Genesis 2 commentary

After six days, God ceased from all works of creation. In miracles, he has overruled nature, but never changed its settled course, or added to it. God did not rest as one weary, but as one well pleased. Notice the beginning of the kingdom of grace, in the sanctification, or keeping holy, of the sabbath day. The solemn observing of one day in seven as a day of holy rest and holy work, to God's honour, is the duty of all to whom God has made known his holy sabbaths. At this time none of the human race were in being but our first parents. For them the sabbath was appointed; and clearly for all succeeding generations also. The Christian sabbath, which we observe, is a seventh day, and in it we celebrate the rest of God the Son, and the finishing the work of our redemption.

Here is a name given to the Creator, “Jehovah.” Where the word “LORD” is printed in capital letters in our English Bibles, in the original it is “Jehovah.” Jehovah is that name of God, which denotes that he alone has his being of himself, and that he gives being to all creatures and things. Further notice is taken of plants and herbs, because they were made and appointed to be food for man. The earth did not bring forth its fruits of itself: this was done by Almighty power. Thus grace in the soul grows not of itself in nature's soil, but is the work of God. Rain also is the gift of God; it came not till the Lord God caused it. Though God works by means, yet when he pleases he can do his own work without them; and though we must not tempt God in the neglect of means, we must trust God, both in the use and in the want of means. Some way or other, God will water the plants of his own planting. Divine grace comes down like the dew, and waters the church without noise. Man was made of the small dust, such as is on the surface of the earth. The soul was not made of the earth, as the body: pity then that it should cleave to the earth, and mind earthly things. To God we must shortly give an account, how we have employed these souls; and if it be found that we have lost them, though it were to gain the world, we are undone for ever! Fools despise their own souls, by caring for their bodies before their souls.

The place fixed upon for Adam to dwell in, was not a palace, but a garden. The better we take up with plain things, and the less we seek things to gratify pride and luxury, the nearer we approach to innocency. Nature is content with a little, and that which is most natural; grace with less; but lust craves every thing, and is content with nothing. No delights can be satisfying to the soul, but those which God himself has provided and appointed for it. Eden signifies delight and pleasure. Wherever it was, it had all desirable conveniences, without any inconvenience, though no other house or garden on earth ever was so. It was adorned with every tree pleasant to the sight, and enriched with every tree that yielded fruit grateful to the taste and good for food. God, as a tender Father, desired not only Adam's profit, but his pleasure; for there is pleasure with innocency, nay there is true pleasure only in innocency. When Providence puts us in a place of plenty and pleasure, we ought to serve God with gladness of heart in the good things he gives us. Eden had two trees peculiar to itself. 1. There was the tree of life in the midst of the garden. Of this man might eat and live. Christ is now to us the Tree of life, Re 2:7; 22:2; and the Bread of life, Joh 6:48, 51. 2. There was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, so called because there was a positive revelation of the will of God about this tree, so that by it man might know moral good and evil. What is good? It is good not to eat of this tree. What is evil? It is evil to eat of this tree. In these two trees God set before Adam good and evil, the blessing and the curse.

After God had formed Adam, he put him in the garden. All boasting was thereby shut out. Only he that made us can make us happy; he that is the Former of our bodies, and the Father of our spirits, and none but he, can fully provide for the happiness of both. Even in paradise itself man had to work. None of us were sent into the world to be idle. He that made our souls and bodies, has given us something to work with; and he that gave us this earth for our habitation, has made us something to work upon. The sons and heirs of heaven, while in this world, have something to do about this earth, which must have its share of their time and thoughts; and if they do it with an eye to God, they as truly serve him in it, as when they are upon their knees. Observe that the husbandman's calling is an ancient and honourable calling; it was needful even in paradise. Also, there is true pleasure in the business God calls us to, and employs us in. Adam could not have been happy if he had been idle: it is still God's law, He that will not work has no right to eat, 2Th 3:10.

Let us never set up our own will against the holy will of God. There was not only liberty allowed to man, in taking the fruits of paradise, but everlasting life made sure to him upon his obedience. There was a trial appointed of his obedience. By transgression he would forfeit his Maker's favour, and deserve his displeasure, with all its awful effects; so that he would become liable to pain, disease, and death. Worse than that, he would lose the holy image of God, and all the comfort of his favour; and feel the torment of sinful passions, and the terror of his Maker's vengeance, which must endure for ever with his never dying soul. The forbidding to eat of the fruit of a particular tree was wisely suited to the state of our first parents. In their state of innocence, and separated from any others, what opportunity or what temptation had they to break any of the ten commandments? The event proves that the whole human race were concerned in the trial and fall of our first parents. To argue against these things is to strive against stubborn facts, as well as Divine revelation; for man is sinful, and shows by his first actions, and his conduct ever afterwards, that he is ready to do evil. He is under the Divine displeasure, exposed to sufferings and death. The Scriptures always speak of man as of this sinful character, and in this miserable state; and these things are true of men in all ages, and of all nations.

Power over the creatures was given to man, and as a proof of this he named them all. It also shows his insight into the works of God. But though he was lord of the creatures, yet nothing in this world was a help meet for man. From God are all our helpers. If we rest in God, he will work all for good. God caused deep sleep to fall on Adam; while he knows no sin, God will take care that he shall feel no pain. God, as her Father, brought the woman to the man, as his second self, and a help meet for him. That wife, who is of God's making by special grace, and of God's bringing by special providence, is likely to prove a help meet for a man. See what need there is, both of prudence and prayer in the choice of this relation, which is so near and so lasting. That had need to be well done, which is to be done for life. Our first parents needed no clothes for covering against cold or heat, for neither could hurt them: they needed none for ornament. Thus easy, thus happy, was man in his state of innocency. How good was God to him! How many favours did he load him with! How easy were the laws given to him! Yet man, being in honour, understood not his own interest, but soon became as the beasts that perish.

1. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished The three verses at the commencement of this chapter evidently belong to the first, being a summing up of the preceding history of the creation, and an account of the sabbatical institution on the seventh day. The remark of Dathe is, “Male capita hoc loco sunt divisa. Tres versus priores ad primum caput sunt referendi.” — Ed. Moses summarily repeats that in six days the fabric of the heaven and the earth was completed. The general division of the world is made into these two parts, as has been stated at the commencement of the first chapter. But he now adds, all the host of them, by which he signifies that the world was furnished with all its garniture. This epilogue, moreover, with sufficient clearness entirely refutes the error of those who imagine that the world was formed in a moment; for it declares that all end was only at length put to the work on the sixth day. Instead of host we might not improperly render the term abundance ; “Copiam,” a questionable rendering, surely of the word צבאם. The Septuagint gives the word κόσμος, and the Vulgate, ornatus; the meaning of both words is “ornaments,” or garniture. The other versions in Walton translate it exercitus, host or army. Fagius, in Poli Synopsi, seems the chief maintainer of Calvin’s interpretation. The words of Poole are, “Alii, virtus, copia eorum, quia eis declarat Deus (sicutrex copiis suis,) potentiam et sapientiam.” — Ed for Moses declares that this world was in every sense completed, as if the whole house were well supplied and filled with its furniture. The heavens without the sun, and moon, and stars, would be an empty and dismantled palace: if the earth were destitute of animals, trees, and plants, that barren waste would have the appearance of a poor and deserted house. God, therefore, did not cease from the work of the creation of the world till he had completed it in every part, so that nothing should be wanting to its suitable abundance.

2. And he rested on the seventh day The question may not improperly be put, what kind of rest this was. For it is certain that inasmuch as God sustains the world by his power, governs it by his providence, cherishes and even propagates all creatures, he is constantly at work. Therefore that saying of Christ is true, that the Father and he himself had worked from the beginning hitherto, John 5:17. This sentence is omitted in Tymme’s English version. — Ed. because, if God should but withdraw his hand a little, all things would immediately perish and dissolve into nothing, as is declared in Psalm 104:29 “Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled; thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust.” And indeed God is rightly acknowledged as the Creator of heaven and earth only whilst their perpetual preservation is ascribed to him. The word translated preservation is vegetationem, which means an enlivening or a quickening motion; to explain this the Old English translation here adds, though without authority, “According to this saying of the apostle, In him we live, and move, and have our being.” — Ed. The solution of the difficulty is well known, that God ceased from all his work, when he desisted from the creation of new kinds of things. But to make the sense clearer, understand that the last touch of God had been put, in order that nothing might be wanting to the perfection of the world. And this is the meaning of the words of Moses, From all his work which he had made ; for he points out the actual state of the work as God would have it to be, as if he had said, then was completed what God had proposed to himself. On the whole, this language is intended merely to express the perfection of the fabric of the world; and therefore we must not infer that God so ceased from his works as to desert them, since they only flourish and subsist in him. Besides, it is to be observed, that in the works of the six days, those things alone are comprehended which tend to the lawful and genuine adorning of the world. It is subsequently that we shall find God saying, Let the earth bring forth thorns and briers, by which he intimates that the appearance of the earth should be different from what it had been in the beginning. But the explanation is at hand; many things which are now seen in the world are rather corruptions of it than any part of its proper furniture. For ever since man declined from his high original, it became necessary that the world should gradually degenerate from its nature. We must come to this conclusion respecting the existence of fleas, caterpillars, and other noxious insects. In all these, I say, there is some deformity of the world, which ought by no means to be regarded as in the order of nature, since it proceeds rather from the sin of man than from the hand of God. Truly these things were created by God, but by God as an avenger. In this place, however, Moses is not considering God as armed for the punishment of the sins of men; but as the Artificer, the Architect, the bountiful Father of a family, who has omitted nothing essential to the perfection of his edifice. At the present time, when we look upon the world corrupted, and as if degenerated from its original creation, let that expression of Paul recur to our mind, that the creature is liable to vanity, not willingly, but through our fault, (Romans 8:20,) and thus let us mourn, being admonished of our just condemnation.

3. And God blessed the seventh day It appears that God is here said to bless according to the manner of men, because they bless him whom they highly extol. Nevertheless, even in this sense, it would not be unsuitable to the character of God; because his blessing sometimes means the favor which he bestows upon his people, as the Hebrews call that man the blessed of God, who, by a certain special favor, has power with God. (See Genesis 24:31.) Enter thou blessed of God. Thus we may be allowed to describe the day as blessed by him which he has embraced with love, to the end that the excellence and dignity of his works may therein be celebrated. Yet I have no doubt that Moses, by adding the word sanctified, wished immediately to explain what he had said, and thus all ambiguity is removed, because the second word is exegetical of the former. For קדש ( kadesh ,) with the Hebrews, is to separate from the common number. God therefore sanctifies the seventh day, when he renders it illustrious, that by a special law it may be distinguished from the rest. Whence it also appears, that God always had respect to the welfare of men. I have said above, that six days were employed in the formation of the world; not that God, to whom one moment is as a thousand years, had need of this succession of time, but that he might engage us in the consideration of his works. He had the same end in view in the appointment of his own rest , for he set apart a day selected out of the remainder for this special use. Wherefore, that benediction is nothing else than a solemn consecration, by which God claims for himself the meditations and employments of men on the seventh day. This is, indeed, the proper business of the whole life, in which men should daily exercise themselves, to consider the infinite goodness, justice, power, and wisdom of God, in this magnificent theater of heaven and earth. But, lest men should prove less sedulously attentive to it than they ought, every seventh day has been especially selected for the purpose of supplying what was wanting in daily meditation. First, therefore, God rested; then he blessed this rest, that in all ages it might be held sacred among men: or he dedicated every seventh day to rest, that his own example might be a perpetual rule. The design of the institution must be always kept in memory: for God did not command men simply to keep holiday every seventh day, as if he delighted in their indolence; but rather that they, being released from all other business, might the more readily apply their minds to the Creator of the world. Lastly, that is a sacred rest, Both in the Amsterdam edition of 1761,a nd Hengstenberg’s, the word is vocatio; but as the French translation gives reste, and the Old English one rest, there can be little doubt that the original word was vacatio, as the sense of the passage seems to require. — Ed. which withdraws men from the impediments of the world, that it may dedicate them entirely to God. But now, since men are so backward to celebrate the justice, wisdom, and power of God, and to consider his benefits, that even when they are most faithfully admonished they still remain torpid, no slight stimulus is given by God’s own example, and the very precept itself is thereby rendered amiable. For God cannot either more gently allure, or more effectually incite us to obedience, than by inviting and exhorting us to the imitation of himself. Besides, we must know, that this is to be the common employment not of one age or people only, but of the whole human race. Afterwards, in the Law, a new precept concerning the Sabbath was given, which should be peculiar to the Jews, and but for a season; because it was a legal ceremony shadowing forth a spiritual rest, the truth of which was manifested in Christ. Therefore the Lord the more frequently testifies that he had given, in the Sabbath, a symbol of sanctification to his ancient people. “Sanctificationis symbolum.” — “A symbol or sign of santification;” that is, a sign that God had set them apart as a holy and peculiar people to himself. “Moreover, also, I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.” Ezekiel 20:12. — Ed. Therefore when we hear that the Sabbath was abrogated by the coming of Christ, we must distinguish between what belongs to the perpetual government of human life, and what properly belongs to ancient figures, the use of which was abolished when the truth was fulfilled. Spiritual rest is the mortification of the flesh; so that the sons of God should no longer live unto themselves, or indulge their own inclination. So far as the Sabbath was a figure of this rest, I say, it was but for a season; but inasmuch as it was commanded to men from the beginning that they might employ themselves in the worship of God, it is right that it should continue to the end of the world.

Which God created and made “Quod creavarat Deus ut faceret.” Hebrew אשר ברא אלהים לעשות. “Which God created to make.” For the various opinions and fancies of learned men on this passage, the reader is referred to Poole’s Synopsis. The more respectable commentators mainly agree with Calvin. Ainsworth says: “created to make, that is, to exist and be, and that perfectly and gloriously, as by divine power of creation. Or rather, created and made perfectly and excellently: for so the Hebrew phrase may be explained.” The version of Dathe is “creando perfecerat,” — “he had perfected in creating.” See also Professor Bush in loco. Le Clerc, whose extraordinary learning and industry render his opinion on merely critical questions of great value, notwithstanding his lamentable scepticism, would rather translate the expression, “which he had begun to make.” But the other translation is to be preferred. Vide Johannes Clericus in Genesin. — Ed Here the Jews, in their usual method, foolishly trifle, saying, that God being anticipated in his work by the last evening, left certain animals imperfect, of which kind are fauns and satyrs, as though he had been one of the ordinary class of artifices who have need of time. Ravings so monstrous prove the authors of them to have been delivered over to a reprobate mind, as a dreadful example of the wrath of God. As to the meaning of Moses, some take it thus: that God created his Works in order to make them, inasmuch as from the time he gave them being, he did not withdraw his hand from their preservation. But this exposition is harsh. Nor do I more willingly subscribe to the opinion of those who refer the word make to man, whom God placed over his works, that he might apply them to use, and in a certain sense perfect them by his industry. I rather think that the perfect form of God’s works is here noted; as if he had said God so created his works that nothing should be wanting to their perfection; or the creation has proceeded to sucks a point, that the work is in all respects perfect.

4. These are the generations A new section of the history of Moses commences at this point; and, from the repetition which occurs of some facts — such as the creation of man — which had been recorded in the preceding chapter, as well as from certain peculiarities of phraseology, many learned men have inferred, that the early portion of the Mosaic history is older than the time of Moses, and that he, under the infallible direction of the Spirit of God, collected and arranged the several fragments of primeval annals in one consistent narrative. One chief argument on which such a conclusion rests is, that from the commencement of the first chapter to the end of the third verse of the second chapter, God is spoken of only under the name of Elohim; from the fourth verse of the second to the end of the third chapter, he is uniformly styled Jehovah Elohim; and in the fourth and fifth chapters, the name of Elohim or of Jehovah stands alone. This, it is argued, could scarcely have occurred without some cause; and the inference has been drawn, that different records had different forms of expression, which Moses did not alter, unless truth required him to do so. See Dathe on the Pentateuch, Professor Bush on Genesis, and Robertson’s Clavis Pentateuchi, where reference will be found to Vitringa and others. Against this view, however, Hengstenberg argues with considerable force, in his Dissertation “on the Names of God in the Pentateuch;” and if some of his reasonings in the use of these names seem too refined for the simplicity of the Holy Scriptures, and for the comprehension of those to whom the Scriptures are chiefly addressed, yet we may discover the germ of very important truths, thought they may be, in some degree, hidden beneath a variety of fanciful developments.

By a very careful examination of the passages in which the terms אלהים ( Elohim ), יהוה ( Jehovah ), and יהוה אלהים ( Jehovah Elohim ), occur, he thinks he has ascertained a reason for the use of each in its place, so that, with some exceptions, in which he allows that one term might have been exchanged for the other, the sense of the passage absolutely requires the introduction of the very appellation, and no other, which is there employed. Believing that a theory so general cannot, with all the author’s ingenuity and learning, be applied in every case, we may still admit the importance of the distinction he makes, and may readily allow that these names are intended to present the Divine character under different aspects to our view. For instance, we may suppose that Elohim and Jehovah have different meanings, arising from their derivations; but we are not to infer, that, in reading the Scriptures, we must have this diversity, or any diversity at all, in our view, when we meet with these different names of Deity.

“These are the generations.” תולדות, ( toledoth ), “modo origines ejus rei de qua sermo est, modo posteros eorum de quibus agitur, significat. Priori sensu hoc loco sumitur posteriori, cap. 5:1.” “The term signifies, sometimes, the origin of the thing spoken of, sometimes the posterity of those who are mentioned. It is taken here in the former of those senses; and in chap. 5:1, in the latter.” — Dathe The design of Moses was deeply to impress upon our minds the origin of the heaven and the earth, which he designates by the word generation . For there have always been ungrateful and malignant men, who, either by feigning, that the world was eternal or by obliterating the memory of the creations would attempt to obscure the glory of God. Thus the devil, by his guile, turns those away from God who are more ingenious and skillful than others in order that each may become a god unto himself. Wherefore, it is not a superfluous repetition which inculcates the necessary fact, that the world existed only from the time when it was created since such knowledge directs us to its Architect and Author. Under the names of heaven and earth, the whole is, by the figure synecdochee , included. Some of the Hebrews thinks that the essential name of God is here at length expressed by Moses, because his majesty shines forth more clearly in the completed world. The word יהוה, Jehovah , here first occurs, — that most sacred and incommunicable name of Deity, called tetragrammaton, because it consisted of four letters, which the Jews, through reverence or superstition, refuse to pronounce. The principal meaning of the term is self-existence; which is, in truth, necessary existence, as opposed to that which is derived from, or is dependent upon, another. It has been supposed by some that Moses here introduces this title of Deity by anticipation; because, in Exodus 6:3, God declares that he had not been previously known by the name of Jehovah. But this, as Dathe forcibly reasons, is to increase difficulties rather than to remove them; for the patriarchs, Abraham and Jacob, are represented as using the name; and God himself, in speaking to them, also makes use of it. The true solution of the passage in Exodus seems to be, that God had not made known to the patriarchs the full import of his name, as he was now about to do. An elaborate investigation of the origin and import of the name יהוה ( Jehovah ,) will be found in the work of Hengstenberg, referred to in the preceding note. He begins with putting aside the notion of an Egyptian origin, which has been put forth with much confidence by those who would trace all the religious peculiarities of the Israelites to their connection with Egypt. He then disposes of the fancied Phoenician pedigree of the name, founded upon spurious fragments ascribed to Sanchoniathon; and concludes the negative part of his argument, by showing that the name was not derived from any heathen source whatever. Consequently, it is to be traced to “a Hebrew etymology.” We need not follow him into the discussion on the right pronunciation of the word, and the use of the vowel points belonging to אדנ, ( Adonai ); it may suffice to state, that he deduces the name היה( Jehovah ,) from the future of the verb הוה or היה, to be . Hence the meaning of the appellation may be expressed in the words, “He who is to be (for ever).” This derivation of the name Jehovah he regards as being confirmed “by all the passages of Scripture, in which a derivation of the name is either expressly given or simply hinted.” And, beginning with the Book of Revelation, at the title ὁ ὡν καὶ ὁ ἤν καὶ ὁ ερχόμενος, “who is, and was, and is to come,” he goes upward through the sacred volume, quoting the passages which bear upon the question, till he comes to the important passage in Exodus in. 13-16, in which God declares his name to be, “I am that I am.” “Everything created,” he adds, “remains not like itself, but is continually changing under circumstances, God only, because he is the being, is always the same; and because he is always the same, is the being.” See Dissertations, p. 231-265.

“The Lord God.”-Jehovah Elohim. The two titles of Deity are here combined. “Elohim,” says Hengstenberg, “is the more general, and Jehovah the deep and more discriminating name of the Godhead.” This may well be admitted, without accepting all the inferences which the author deduces. — Ed.

5. And every plant This verse is connected with the preceding, and must be read in continuation with it; for he annexes the plants and herbs to the earth, as the garment with which the Lord has adorned it, lest its nakedness should appear as a deformity. The noun שיה ( sicah , שיח Frutex, stirps; a shrub — “cujus pulluli in summa tellure expatiantur,” — “whose shoots are spread abroad over the surface of the earth.” — Robertson’s Clavis Pentateuch. — Ed ) which we translate plant, sometimes signifies trees, as below, (Genesis 21:15 “And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs.” — English version. ) Therefore, some in this place translate it shrub , to which I have no objection. Yet the word plant is not unsuitable; because in the former place, Moses seems to refer to the genus, and here to the species. It seems remarkable that Calvin should himself translate the word “virgultum,” and then reason, in his commentary, as if he preferred the word “planta.” — Ed. But although he has before related that the herbs were created on the third day, yet it is not without reason that here again mention is made of them, in order that we may know that they were then produced, preserved, and propagated, in a manner different from that which we perceive at the present day. For herbs and trees are produced from seed; or grafts are taken from another roots or they grow by putting forth shoots: in all this the industry and the hand of man are engaged. But, at that time, the method was different: God clothed the earth, not in the same manner as now, (for there was no seed, no root, no plant, which might germinate,) but each suddenly sprung into existence at the command of God, and by the power of his word. They possessed durable vigor, so that they might stand by the force of their own nature, and not by that quickening influence which is now perceived, not by the help of rain, not by the irrigation or culture of man; but by the vapor with which God watered the earth. For he excludes these two things, the rain whence the earth derives moisture, that it may retain its native sap; and human culture, which is the assistant of nature. When he says, that God had ‘not yet caused it to rain,’ he at the same time intimates that it is God who opens and shuts the cataracts of heaven, and that rain and drought are in his hand.

7. And the Lord God formed man He now explains what he had before omitted in the creation of man, that his body was taken out of the earth. He had said that he was formed after the image of God. This is incomparably the highest nobility; and, lest men should use it as an occasion of pride, their first origin is placed immediately before them; whence they may learn that this advantage was adventitious; for Moses relates that man had been, in the beginning, dust of the earth. Let foolish men now go and boast of the excellency of their nature! Concerning other animals, it had before been said, Let the earth produce every living creature; “Omnem animam viventum,” — “every living soul.” The word is applied here, and frequently in the Holy Scriptures, to describe only the sensitive and animal life, that by which a created being breathes; and thus distinguishes the animal from the vegetative life. — Ed. but, on the other hand, the body of Adam is formed of clay, and destitute of sense; to the end that no one should exult beyond measure in his flesh. He must be excessively stupid who does not hence learn humility. That which is afterwards added from another quarter, lays us under just so much obligation to God. Nevertheless, he, at the same time, designed to distinguish man by some mark of excellence from brute animals: for these arose out of the earth in a moment; but the peculiar dignity of man is shown in this, that he was gradually formed. For why did not God command him immediately to spring alive out of the earth, unless that, by a special privilege, he might outshine all the creatures which the earth produced?

And breathed into his nostrils “Inspiraverat in faciem.” Whatever the greater part of the ancients might think, I do not hesitate to subscribe to the opinion of those who explain this passage of the animal life of man; and thus I expound what they call the vital spirits by the word breath . Should any one object, that if so, no distinction would be made between man and other living creatures, since here Moses relates only what is common alike to all: I answer, though here mention is made only of the lower faculty of the soul, which imparts breath to the body, and gives it vigor and motion: this does not prevent the human soul from having its proper rank, and therefore it ought to be distinguished from others. “Non tamen obstare quin gradum suum obtineat anima, ideoque seorsum poni debuerit.” Moses first speaks of the breath; he then adds, that a soul was given to man by which he might live, and be endued with sense and motion. Now we know that the powers of the human mind are many and various. Wherefore, there is nothing absurd in supposing that Moses here alludes only to one of them; but omits the intellectual part, of which mention has been made in the first chapter. Three gradations, indeed, are to be noted in the creation of man; that his dead body was formed out of the dust of the earth; that it was endued with a soul, whence it should receive vital motion; and that on this soul God engraved his own image, to which immortality is annexed.

Man became a living soul “Factus est in animam viventem.” I take נפש ( nepesh ,) for the very essence of the soul: but the epithet living suits only the present place, and does not embrace generally the powers of the soul. For Moses intended nothing more than to explain the animating of the clayey figure, whereby it came to pass that man began to live. Paul makes an antithesis between this living soul and the quickening spirit which Christ confers upon the faithful, (1 Corinthians 15:45,) for no other purpose than to teach us that the state of man was not perfected in the person of Adam; but it is a peculiar benefit conferred by Christ, that we may be renewed to a life which is celestial , whereas before the fall of Adams man’s life was only earthly, seeing it had no firm and settled constancy.

8. And the Lord God planted “Plantaverat quoque Dominus.” — “The Lord had also planted.” Moses now adds the condition and rule of living which were given to man. And, first, he narrates in what part of the world he was placed, and what a happy and pleasant habitation was allotted to him. Moses says, that God had planted accommodating himself, by a simple and uncultivated style, to the capacity of the vulgar. For since the majesty of God, as it really is, cannot be expressed, the Scripture is wont to describe it according to the manner of men. God, then, had planted Paradise in a place which he had especially embellished with every variety of delights, with abounding fruits and with all other most excellent gifts. For this reason it is called a garden, on account of the elegance of its situation, and the beauty of its form. The ancient interpreter has not improperly translated it Paradise; “Paradisum.” — Vulgate. because the Hebrews call the more highly cultivated gardens פרדסים( Pardaisim , פרדס Baumgarten, Park, etc. “Wahrschenlich aus der Persichen Sprache, wo es die Lustparks der Koenige bezeichnet.” — “Orchard, Park, etc. — probably from the Persian, where it signifies the pleasure — parks of kings.” — Gesenius ) and Xenophon pronounces the word to be Persian, when he treats of the magnificent and sumptuous gardens of kings. That region which the Lord assigned to Adam, as the firstborn of mankind, was one selected out of the whole world.

In Eden That Jerome improperly translates this, from the beginning, “Plantaverat autem Dominus Deus Paradisum voluptatis a principio.” — “But the Lord God had planted a paradise from the beginning.” — Vulgate. is very obvious: because Moses afterwards says, that Cain dwelt in the southern region of this place. Moreover it is to be observed, that when he describes paradise as in the east, he speaks in reference to the Jews, for he directs his discourse to his own people. Hence we infer, in the first place, that there was a certain region assigned by God to the first man, in which he might have his home. I state this expressly, because there have been authors who would extend this garden over all regions of the world. Truly, I confess, that if the earth had not been cursed on account of the sin of man, the whole — as it had been blessed from the beginning — would have remained the fairest scene both of fruitfulness and of delight; that it would have been, in short, not dissimilar to Paradise, when compared with that scene of deformity which we now behold. But when Moses here describes particularly the situation of the region, they absurdly transfer what Moses said of a certain particular place to the whole world. It is not indeed doubtful (as I just now hinted) that God would choose the most fertile and pleasant place, the first-fruits (so to speak) of the earth, as his gift to Adam, whom he had dignified with the honor of primogeniture among men, in token of his special favor. Again, we infer, that this garden was situated on the earth, not as some dream in the air; for unless it had been a region of our world, it would not have been placed opposite to Judea, towards the east. We must, however, entirely reject the allegories of Origin, and of others like him, which Satan, with the deepest subtlety, has endeavored to introduce into the Church, for the purpose of rendering the doctrine of Scripture ambiguous and destitute of all certainty and firmness. It may be, indeed, that some, impelled by a supposed necessity, have resorted to an allegorical sense, because they never found in the world such a place as is described by Moses: but we see that the greater part, through a foolish affectation of subtleties, have been too much addicted to allegories. As it concerns the present passage, they speculate in vain, and to no purpose, by departing from the literal sense. For Moses has no other design than to teach man that he was formed by God, with this condition, that he should have dominion over the earth, from which he might gather fruit, and thus learn by daily experience that the world was subject unto him. What advantage is it to fly in the air, and to leave the earth, where God has given proof of his benevolence towards the human race? But some one may say, that to interpret this of celestial bliss is more skillful. I answer, since the eternal inheritance of man is in heaven, it is truly right that we should tend thither; yet must we fix our foot on earth long enough to enable us to consider the abode which God requires man to use for a time. For we are now conversant with that history which teaches us that Adam was, by Divine appointment, an inhabitant of the earth, in order that he might, in passing through his earthly life, meditate on heavenly glory; and that he had been bountifully enriched by the Lord with innumerable benefits, from the enjoyment of which he might infer the paternal benevolence of God. Moses, also, will hereafter subjoin that he was commanded to cultivate the fields and permitted to eat certain fruits: all which things neither suit the circle of the moon, nor the aerial regions. But although we have said, that the situation of Paradise lay between the rising of the sun and Judea, yet something more definite may be required respecting that region. They who contend that it was in the vicinity of Mesopotamia, rely on reasons not to be despised; because it is probable that the sons of Eden were contiguous to the river Tigris. But as the description of it by Moses will immediately follow, it is better to defer the consideration of it to that place. The ancient interpreter has fallen into a mistake in translating the proper name Eden by the word pleasure. The Hebrew word עדן signifies pleasure, delight, loveliness. — Ed I do not indeed deny that the place was so called from its delights; but it is easy to infer that the name was imposed upon the place to distinguish it from others.

9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow The production here spoken of belongs to the third day of the creation. But Moses expressly declares the place to have been richly replenished with every kind of fruitful trees, that there might be a full and happy abundance of all things. This was purposely done by the Lord, to the end that the cupidity of man might have the less excuse if, instead of being contented with such remarkable affluence, sweetness, and variety, it should (as really happened) precipitate itself against the commandment of God. The Holy Spirit also designedly relates by Moses the greatness of Adam’s happiness, in order that his vile intemperance might the more clearly appear, which such superfluity was unable to restrain from breaking forth upon the forbidden fruit. And certainly it was shameful ingratitude, that he could not rest in a state so happy and desirable: truly, that was more than brutal lust which bounty so great was not able to satisfy. No corner of the earth was then barren, nor was there even any which was not exceedingly rich and fertile: but that benediction of God, which was elsewhere comparatively moderate, had in this place poured itself wonderfully forth. For not only was there an abundant supply of food, but with it was added sweetness for the gratification of the palate, and beauty to feast the eyes. Therefore, from such benignant indulgence, it is more than sufficiently evident, how inexplicable had been the cupidity of man.

The tree of life also It is uncertain whether he means only two individual trees, or two kinds of trees. Either opinion is probable, but the point is by no means worthy of contention; since it is of little or no concern to us, which of the two is maintained. There is more importance in the epithets, which were applied to each tree from its effect, and that not by the will of man but of God. The above passage is wholly omitted in the Old English translation by Tymme. — Ed. He gave the tree of life its name, not because it could confer on man that life with which he had been previously endued, but in order that it might be a symbol and memorial of the life which he had received from God. For we know it to be by no means unusual that God should give to us the attestation of his grace by external symbols. “Scimus minime esse insolens ut virtutem suam Deus externis symbolis testatam nobis reddat.” — “Nous savons que ce n’est point chose nouvelle, que Dieu nous testifie sa vertu par signes exterieurs.” — French Trans. Virtus in Latin, and vertu in French, may both signify power, virtue, efficacy; but it seems that the term grace more correctly conveys to an English ear the meaning of the Author. — Ed.

On the sacramental character of the tree of life, which Calvin here maintains, but which Dr. Kennicott, in his first Dissertation, endeavors, with more learning than sound judgment, to set aside, the generality of commentators seem to be agreed. See Patrick, Scott, etc. Patrick says, — “This garden being a type of heaven, perhaps God intended by this tree to represent that immortal life which he meant to bestow upon man with himself, (Revelation 22:2). And so St. Austin, in that famous saying of his, ‘Erat ei in caeteris lignis Alimentum, in isto autem Sacrcramentum.’ In other trees there was nourishment for man; but in this also a sacrament. For it was both a symbol of that life which God had already bestowed upon man, and of that life which he was to hope for in another world, if he proved obedient.” — Ed. He does not indeed transfer his power into outward signs; but by them he stretches out his hand to us, because, without assistance, we cannot ascend to him. He intended, therefore, that man, as often as he tasted the fruit of that tree, should remember whence he received his life, in order that he might acknowledge that he lives not by his own power, but by the kindness of God alone; and that life is not (as they commonly speak) an intrinsic good, but proceeds from God. Finally, in that tree there was a visible testimony to the declaration, that ‘in God we are, and live, and move.’ But if Adams hitherto innocent, and of an upright nature, had need of monitory signs to lead him to the knowledge of divine grace, how much more necessary are signs now, in this great imbecility of our nature, since we have fallen from the true light? Yet I am not dissatisfied with what has been handed down by some of the fathers, as Augustine and Eucherius, that the tree of life was a figure of Christ, inasmuch as he is the Eternal Word of God: it could not indeed be otherwise a symbol of life, than by representing him in figure. For we must maintain what is declared in the first chapter of John (John 1:1-3,) that the life of all things was included in the Word, but especially the life of men, which is conjoined with reason and intelligence. Wherefore, by this sign, Adam was admonished, that he could claim nothing for himself as if it were his own, in order that he might depend wholly upon the Son of God, and might not seek life anywhere but in him. But if he, at the time when he possessed life in safety, had it only as deposited in the word of God, and could not otherwise retain it, than by acknowledging that it was received from Him, whence may we recover it, after it has been lost? Let us know, therefore, that when we have departed from Christ, nothing remains for us but death.

I know that certain writers restrict the meaning of the expression here used to corporeal life. They suppose such a power of quickening the body to have been in the tree, that it should never languish through age; but I say, they omit what is the chief thing in life, namely, the grace of intelligence; for we must always consider for what end man was formed, and what rule of living was prescribed to him. Certainly, for him to live, was not simply to have a body fresh and lively, but also to excel in the endowments of the soul.

Concerning the tree of knowledge of good and evil, we must hold, that it was prohibited to man, not because God would have him to stray like a sheep, without judgment and without choice; but that he might not seek to be wiser than became him, nor by trusting to his own understanding, cast off the yoke of God, and constitute himself an arbiter and judge of good and evil. His sin proceeded from an evil conscience; whence it follows, that a judgment had been given him, by which he might discriminate between virtues and vices. Nor could what Moses relates be otherwise true, namely, that he was created in the image of God; since the image of God comprises in itself the knowledge of him who is the chief good. Thoroughly insane, therefore, and monsters of men are the libertines, who pretend that we are restored to a state of innocence, when each is carried away by his own lust without judgment. We now understand what is meant by abstaining from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; namely, that Adam might not, in attempting one thing or another, rely upon his own prudence; but that, cleaving to God alone, he might become wise only by his obedience. Knowledge is here, therefore, taken disparagingly, in a bad sense, for that wretched experience which man, when he departed from the only fountain of perfect wisdom, began to acquire for himself. And this is the origin of freewill, that Adam wished to be independent, “Dum Adam per se esse voluit, et quid valeret tentare ausus est.” — Lat. and dared to try what he was able to do.

10. And a river went out Moses says that one river flowed to water the garden, which afterwards would divide itself into four heads. It is sufficiently agreed among all, that two of these heads are the Euphrates and the Tigris; for no one disputes that הידקל( Hiddekel ) is the Tigris. But there is a great controversy respecting the other two. Many think, that Pison and Gihon are the Ganges and the Nile; the error, however, of these men is abundantly refuted by the distance of the positions of these rivers. Persons are not wanting who fly across even to the Danube; as if indeed the habitation of one man stretched itself from the most remote part of Asia to the extremity of Europe. But since many other celebrated rivers flow by the region of which we are speaking, there is greater probability in the opinion of those who believe that two of these rivers are pointed out, although their names are now obsolete. Be this as it may, the difficulty is not yet solved. For Moses divides the one river which flowed by the garden into four heads. Yet it appears, that the fountains of the Euphrates and the Tigris were far distant from each other. From this difficulty, some would free themselves by saying, that the surface of the globe may have been changed by the deluge; and, therefore, they imagine it might have happened that the courses of the rivers were disturbed and changed, and their springs transferred elsewhere; a solution which appears to me by no means to be accepted. For although I acknowledge that the earth, from the time that it was accursed, became reduced from its native beauty to a state of wretched defilement, and to a garb of mourning, and afterwards was further laid waste in many places by the deluge; still, I assert, it was the same earth which had been created in the beginning. Add to this, that Moses (in my judgment) accommodated his topography to the capacity of his age. Yet nothing is accomplished, unless we find that place where the Tigris and Euphrates proceed from one river. Observe, first, that no mention is made of a spring or fountain, but only that it is said, there was one river. But the four heads I understand to mean, both the beginnings from which the rivers are produced, and the mouths It appears that by the beginnings (principia) and the mouths (ostia) of the rivers, Calvin simply means the streams above, and the streams below, the site of the garden. — Ed. by which they discharge themselves into the sea. Now the Euphrates was formerly so joined by confluence with the Tigris, that it might justly be said, one river was divided into four heads; especially if what is manifest to all be conceded, that Moses does not speak acutely, nor in a philosophical manner, but popularly, so that every one least informed may understand him. Thus, in the first chapter, he called the sun and moon two great luminaries; not because the moon exceeded other planets in magnitude, but because, to common observation, it seemed greater. Add further, that he seems to remove all doubt when he says, that the river had four heads, because it was divided from that place. What does this mean, except that the channels were divided, out of one confluent stream, either above or below Paradise? I will now submit a plan to view, that the readers may understand where I think Paradise was placed by Moses. This is a facsimile from the Old English translation; and the same, with Latin and French names, are introduced in the early editions of each language. — Ed.

Pliny indeed relates, in his Sixth Book, that the Euphrates was so stopped in its course by the Orcheni, that it could not flow into the sea, except through the Tigris. “The Orcheni inhabiting a city name Orchoe, caused the diminution of the Euphrates, by derving it through their lands, which could not otherwise be watered.” — D’Anville’s Ancient Geography. And Pomponius Mela, in his Third Book, denies that it flowed by any given outlet, as other rivers, but says that it failed in its course. Nearchus, however, (whom Alexander had made commander of his fleet, and who, under his sanction, had navigated all these regions,) reckons the distance from the mouth of the Euphrates to Babylon, three thousand three hundred stadia. About 420 miles. But he places the mouths of the Tigris at the entrance of Susiana; in which region, returning from that long and memorable voyage, he met the king with his fleet, as Adrian relates in his Eighth Book of the Exploits of Alexander. This statement Strabo also confirms by his testimony in his Fifteenth Book. Nevertheless, wherever the Euphrates either submerges or mingles its stream, it is certain, that it and the Tigris, below the point of their confluence, are again divided. Adrian, however, in his Seventh Book, writes that not one channel only of the Euphrates runs into the Tigris, but also many rivers and ditches, because waters naturally descend from higher to lower ground. With respect to the confluence, which I have noted in the plate, the opinion of some was, that it had been effected be the labor of the Praefect Cobaris, lest the Euphrates, by its precipitate course, should injure Babylon. But he speaks of it as of a doubtful matter. It is more credible, that men, by art and industry, followed the guidance of Nature in forming ditches, when they saw the Euphrates any where flowing of its own accord from the higher ground into the Tigris. Moreover, if confidence is placed in Pomponius Mela, Semiramis conducted the Tigris and Euphrates into Mesopotamia, which was previously dry; a thing by no means credible. There is more truth in the statement of Strabo, — a diligent and attentive writer, — in his Eleventh Book, that at Babylon these two rivers unite: and then, that each is carried separately, in its own bed, into the Red Sea. Mare Rubrum. By the Red Sea, in this place, is not meant the Gulf of Suez, which is called by that name in sacred history, and over which the Israelites passed in their journey from Egypt to Canaan; but the Indian Ocean, the Mare Erythraeum of the ancients, into which the Tigris and Euphrates flowed, through the Persian Gulf. — Ed. He understands that junction to have taken place above Babylon, not far from the town Massica, as we read in the Fifth Book of Pliny. Thence one river flows through Babylon, the other glides by Seleucia, two of the most celebrated and opulent cities. If we admit this confluence, by which the Euphrates was mixed with the Tigris, to have been natural, and to have existed from the beginning, all absurdity is removed. If there is anywhere under heaven a region preeminent in beauty, in the abundance of all kinds of fruit, in fertility, in delicacies, and in other gifts, that is the region which writers most celebrate. Wherefore, the eulogies with which Moses commends Paradise are such as properly belong to a tract of this description. And that the region of Eden was situated in those parts is probable from Isaiah 37:12 Ezekiel 27:23. Moreover, when Moses declares that a river went forth, I understand him as speaking of the flowing of the stream; as if he had said, that Adam dwelt on the bank of the river, or in that land which was watered on both sides if you choose to take Paradise for both banks of the river. However, it makes no great difference whether Adam dwelt below the confluent stream towards Babylon and Seleucia, or in the higher part; it is enough that he occupied a well-watered country. How the river was divided into four heads is not difficult to understand. For there are two rivers which flow together into one, and then separate in different directions; thus, it is one at the point of confluence, but there are two heads Or “principal streams.” “The river, or single channel, must be looked upon as a highway, crossing over a forest, and which may be said from thence to divide itself into four ways, whether the division be made above or below the forest.” — Well’s Geography of the Old and New Test., vol. 1, p. 19.

The reader is referred to the first chapter of that useful work, for an account agreeing in many points with Calvin, though differing from it in others. The principal difference in the two accounts lies in this, that Wells places the site of Paradise near the Persian Gulf into which the Tigris and Euphrates discharge themselves, while Calvin fixes it higher up the streams, in the vicinity of ancient Babylon. Wells derives his account mainly from the celebrated French Bishop, Peter Daniel Huet, who had been the intimate friend of the famous Protestant traveler Bochart. The following extract from a note in the Clavis Pentateuchi of Robertson is added for the reader’s satisfaction: — “Eden est regio sen in Mesopotamio, sen non procul inde. Observandum est hancce sententiam Calvini, quam parum emendaverat clarissimus Huetis, verissimam omnium videri: Hoc demonstravit calrissimus Vitringa, qui paululum in quibusdam circumstantis etiam Huetium emendaverat.” — “Eden is a region either in Mesopotamia, or near it. It is to be observed, that this opinion of Calvin, which the celebrated Huet has slightly amended, seems to be the most true of all. The celebrated Vitringa has demonstrated this; who also, in some circumstances, has slightly amended Huet.” — Robertson’s Clavis, p. 177. — Ed. in its upper channels, and two towards the sea; afterwards, they again begin to be more widely separated.

The question remains concerning the names Pison and Gihon. For it does not seem consonant with reason, to assign a double name to each of the rivers. But it is nothing new for rivers to change their names in their course, especially where there is any special mark of distinction. The Tigris itself (by the authority of Pliny) is called Diglito near its source; but after it has formed many channels, and again coalesces, it takes the name of Pasitigris. There is, therefore, no absurdity in saying, that after its confluence it had different names. Further there is some such affinity between Pasin and Pison, as to render it not improbable, that the name Pasitigris is a vestige of the ancient appellation. In the Fifth Book of Quintus Curtius, concerning the Exploits of Alexander, where mention is made of Pasitigris, some copies read, that it was called by the inhabitants Pasin. Nor do the other circumstances, by which Moses describes three of these rivers, in accord with this supposition. Pison surrounds Circuit. It is observed, that the word surrounds, or “compasses,” conveys, to an English reader, more than is meant by the sacred writer. He only intends to say, that the river sweeps round in that direction, so as to embrace, by its winding, a part of the region of Havila. Flexuoso cursu alluit. — Johannes Clericus in loco. — Ed. the land of Havila, where gold is produced. Surrounding is rightly attributed to the Tigris, on account of its winding course below Mesopotamia. The land of Havila, in my judgment, is here taken for a region adjoining Persia. For subsequently, in the twenty-fifth chapter (Genesis 25:1,) Moses relates, that the Ishmaelites dwelt from Havila unto Shur, which is contiguous to Egypt, and through which the road lies into Assyria. Havila, as one boundary, is opposed to Shur as another, and this boundary Moses places near Egypt, on the side which lies towards Assyria. Whence it follows, that Havila (the other boundary) extends towards Susia and Persia. For it is necessary that it should lie below Assyria towards the Persian Sea; besides, it is placed at a great distance from Egypt; because Moses enumerates many nations which dwelt between these boundaries. That is, the nations peopled by the twelve sons of Ishmael. See Genesis 25:13-16. — Ed. Then it appears that the Nabathaeans, The descendants of Nebajoth, the eldest son of Ishmael. Yet, as they inhabited the western side of the great desert of Arabia, which lay between them and the Euphrates, they cannot, with much propriety, be called neighbors to the Persians. — Ed. of whom mention is there made, were neighbors to the Persian. Every thing which Moses asserts respecting gold and precious stones is most applicable to this district. “There is bdellium and the onyx-stone.” It is a question among the learned, whether bdellium is an aromatic gum of great value, or a pearl. Dathe, however, renders this word “crystal,” and the next, “emerald.” — Ed.

The river Gihon still remains to be noticed, which, as Moses declares, waters the land of Chus. All interpreters translate this word Ethiopia; but the country of the Midianites, and the conterminous country of Arabia, are included under the same name by Moses; for which reason, his wife is elsewhere called an Ethiopian woman. Moreover, since the lower course of the Euphrates tends toward that region, I do not see why it should be deemed absurd, that it there receives the name of Gihon. And thus the simple meaning of Moses is, that the garden of which Adam was the possessor was well watered, the channel of a river passing that way, which was afterwards divided into four heads. It would be wrong to omit all mention of the work of Adrian Reland on this subject; who devoted to it the most profound learning and diligent investigation. An abstract of his description is given in Dr. Adam Clarke’s Commentary. He places Eden in Armenia, near the sources of the Euphrates and Tigris, which flow into the Persian Gulf, the Phasis (Pison,) which empties itself into the Euxine, where Chabala, corresponding with Havila, is famous for its gold; and the Araxes, (Gihon,) which runs into the Caspian. The objection to this locality is, that these rivers do not actually meet together; so that they cannot be said to divide into four heads, or principal streams in Eden. The learned reader may see Dathe’s Commentary on the Pentateuch, p. 23, note (k.) — Ed.

15. And the Lord God took the man Moses now adds, that the earth was given to man, with this condition, that he should occupy himself in its cultivation. Whence it follows that men were created to employ themselves in some work, and not to lie down in inactivity and idleness. This labor, truly, was pleasant, and full of delight, entirely exempt from all trouble and weariness; since however God ordained that man should be exercised in the culture of the ground, he condemned in his person, all indolent repose. Wherefore, nothing is more contrary to the order of nature, than to consume life in eating, drinking, and sleeping, while in the meantime we propose nothing to ourselves to do. Moses adds, that the custody of the garden was given in charge to Adam, to show that we possess the things which God has committed to our hands, on the condition, that being content with a frugal and moderate use of them, we should take care of what shall remain. Let him who possesses a field, so partake of its yearly fruits, that he may not suffer the ground to be injured by his negligence; but let him endeavor to hand it down to posterity as he received it, or even better cultivated. Let him so feed on its fruits that he neither dissipates it by luxury, nor permits to be marred or ruined by neglect. Moreover, that this economy, and this diligence, with respect to those good things which God has given us to enjoy, may flourish among us; let every one regard himself as the steward of God in all things which he possesses. Then he will neither conduct himself dissolutely, nor corrupt by abuse those things which God requires to be preserved.

16. And the Lord God commanded Moses now teaches, that man was the governor of the world, with this exception, that he should, nevertheless, be subject to God. A law is imposed upon him in token of his subjection; for it would have made no difference to God, if he had eaten indiscriminately of any fruit he pleased. Therefore the prohibition of one tree was a test of obedience. And in this mode, God designed that the whole human race should be accustomed from the beginning to reverence his Deity; as, doubtless, it was necessary that man, adorned and enriched with so many excellent gifts, should be held under restraint, lest he should break forth into licentiousness. There was, indeed, another special reason, to which we have before alluded, lest Adam should desire to be wise above measure; but this is to be kept in mind as God’s general design, that he would have men subject to his authority. Therefore, abstinence from the fruit of one tree was a kind of first lesson in obedience, that man might know he had a Director and Lord of his life, on whose will he ought to depend, and in whose commands he ought to acquiesce. And this, truly, is the only rule of living well and rationally, that men should exercise themselves in obeying God. It seems, however, to some as if this did not accord with the judgment of Paul, when he teaches, that the law was not made for the righteous, (1 Timothy 1:9.) For if it be so, then, when Adam was yet innocent and upright, he had no need of a law. But the solution is ready. For Paul is not there writing controversially; but from the common practice of life, he declares, that they who freely run, do not require to be compelled by the necessity of law; as it is said, in the common proverb, that ‘Good laws spring from bad manners.’ In the meantime, he does not deny that God, from the beginning, imposed a law upon man, for the purpose of maintaining the right due to himself. Should any one bring, as an objection, another statement of Paul, where he asserts that the “law is the minister of death,” (2 Corinthians 3:7,) I answer, it is so accidentally, and from the corruption of our nature. But at the time of which we speak, a precept was given to man, whence he might know that God ruled over him. These minute things, however I lightly pass over. What I have before said, since it is of far greater moment, is to be frequently recalled to memory, namely, that our life will then be rightly ordered, if we obey God, and if his will be the regulator of all our affections.

Of every tree To the end that Adam might the more willingly comply, God commends his own liberality. ‘Behold,’ he says, ‘I deliver into thy hand whatever fruits the earth may produce, whatever fruits every kind of tree may yield: from this immense profusion and variety I except only one tree.’ Then, by denouncing punishment, he strikes terror, for the purpose of confirming the authority of the law. So much the greater, then, is the wickedness of man, whom neither that kind commemoration of the gifts of God, nor the dread of punishment, was able to retain in his duty.

But it is asked, what kind of death God means in this place? It appears to me, that the definition of this death is to be sought from its opposite; we must, I say, remember from what kind of life man fell. He was, in every respect, happy; his life, therefore, had alike respect to his body and his soul, since in his soul a right judgment and a proper government of the affections prevailed, there also life reigned; in his body there was no defect, wherefore he was wholly free from death. His earthly life truly would have been temporal; yet he would have passed into heaven without death, and without injury. Death, therefore, is now a terror to us; first, because there is a kind of annihilation, as it respects the body; then, because the soul feels the curse of God. We must also see what is the cause of death, namely alienation from God. Thence it follows, that under the name of death is comprehended all those miseries in which Adam involved himself by his defection; for as soon as he revolted from God, the fountain of life, he was cast down from his former state, in order that he might perceive the life of man without God to be wretched and lost, and therefore differing nothing from death. Hence the condition of man after his sin is not improperly called both the privation of life, and death. The miseries and evils both of soul and body, with which man is beset so long as he is on earth, are a kind of entrance into death, till death itself entirely absorbs him; for the Scripture everywhere calls those dead who, being oppressed by the tyranny of sin and Satan, breath nothing but their own destruction. Wherefore the question is superfluous, how it was that God threatened death to Adam on the day in which he should touch the fruit, when he long deferred the punishment? For then was Adam consigned to death, and death began its reign in him, until supervening grace should bring a remedy.

18. It is not good that the man should be alone “Non est bonum ut sit Adam solus.” This is a variation from Calvin’s text, which has man instead of Adam; as the English version has. The word אדם stands for both. As a proper name, it means Adam; as an appellation, it belongs to the human species; as an adjective, it means red; and, with a slight alteration, it signifies the ground. — Ed Moses now explains the design of God in creating the woman; namely, that there should be human beings on the earth who might cultivate mutual society between themselves. Yet a doubt may arise whether this design ought to be extended to progeny, for the words simply mean that since it was not expedient for man to be alone, a wife must be created, who might be his helper. I, however, take the meaning to be this, that God begins, indeed, at the first step of human society, yet designs to include others, each in its proper place. The commencement, therefore, involves a general principle, that man was formed to be a social animal. “Principium ergo generale est, conditum esse hominem ut sit sociale animal.” Now, the human race could not exist without the woman; and, therefore, in the conjunction of human beings, that sacred bond is especially conspicuous, by which the husband and the wife are combined in one body, and one soul; as nature itself taught Plato, and others of the sounder class of philosophers, to speak. But although God pronounced, concerning Adam, that it would not be profitable for him to be alone, yet I do not restrict the declaration to his person alone, but rather regard it as a common law of man’s vocation, so that every one ought to receive it as said to himself, that solitude is not good, excepting only him whom God exempts as by a special privilege. Many think that celibacy conduces to their advantage, “Putant multi suisrationibus conducere coelibatum.” — “Plusieurs estiment que le celibat — leur est plus profitable.” — French Tr. and therefore, abstain from marriage, lest they should be miserable. Not only have heathen writers defined that to be a happy life which is passed without a wife, but the first book of Jerome, against Jovinian, is stuffed with petulant reproaches, by which he attempts to render hallowed wedlock both hateful and infamous. To these wicked suggestions of Satan let the faithful learn to oppose this declaration of God, by which he ordains the conjugal life for man, not to his destruction, but to his salvation.

I will make him an help It may be inquired, why this is not said in the plural number, Let us make , as before in the creation of man. Some suppose that a distinction between the two sexes is in this manner marked, and that it is thus shown how much the man excels the woman. But I am better satisfied with an interpretation which, though not altogether contrary, is yet different; namely, since in the person of the man the human race had been created, the common dignity of our whole nature was without distinction, honored with one eulogy, when it was said, Let us make man; nor was it necessary to be repeated in creating the woman, who was nothing else than an accession to the man. Certainly, it cannot be denied, that the woman also, though in the second degree, was created in the image of God; whence it follows, that what was said in the creation of the man belongs to the female sex. Now, since God assigns the woman as a help to the man, he not only prescribes to wives the rule of their vocation to instruct them in their duty, but he also pronounces that marriage will really prove to men the best support of life. We may therefore conclude, that the order of nature implies that the woman should be the helper of the man. The vulgar proverb, indeed, is, that she is a necessary evil; but the voice of God is rather to be heard, which declares that woman is given as a companion and an associate to the man, to assist him to live well. I confess, indeed, that in this corrupt state of mankind, the blessing of God, which is here described, is neither perceived nor flourishes; but the cause of the evil must be considered, namely, that the order of nature, which God had appointed, has been inverted by us. For if the integrity of man had remained to this day such as it was from the beginning, that divine institution would be clearly discerned, and the sweetest harmony would reign in marriage; because the husband would look up with reverence to God; the woman in this would be a faithful assistant to him; and both, with one consent, would cultivate a holy, as well as friendly and peaceful intercourse. Now, it has happened by our fault, and by the corruption of nature, that this happiness of marriage has, in a great measure, perished, or, at least, is mixed and infected with many inconveniences. Hence arise strifes, troubles, sorrows, dissensions, and a boundless sea of evils; and hence it follows, that men are often disturbed by their wives, and suffer through them many discouragements. Still, marriage was not capable of being so far vitiated by the depravity of men, that the blessing which God has once sanctioned by his word should be utterly abolished and extinguished. Therefore, amidst many inconveniences of marriage, which are the fruits of degenerate nature, some residue of divine good remains; as in the fire apparently smothered, some sparks still glitter. On this main point hangs another, that women, being instructed in their duty of helping their husbands, should study to keep this divinely appointed order. It is also the part of men to consider what they owe in return to the other half of their kind, for the obligation of both sexes is mutual, and on this condition is the woman assigned as a help to the man, that he may fill the place of her head and leader. One thing more is to be noted, that, when the woman is here called the help of the man, no allusion is made to that necessity to which we are reduced since the fall of Adam; for the woman was ordained to be the man’s helper, even although he had stood in his integrity. But now, since the depravity of appetite also requires a remedy, we have from God a double benefit: but the latter is accidental.

Meet for him “Coram ipso,” before him. — “Pour luy assister,” to help him. — French Tr. In the Hebrew it is כנגדו ( kenegedo ,) “as if opposite to,” or “over against him.” כ ( Caph ) in that language is a note of similitude. But although some of the Rabbies think it is here put as an affirmative, yet I take it in its general sense, as though it were said that she is a kind of counterpart, (ἀντίστοικον, or ἀντίστροφον; Quod “ex adverso ei” respondet. Lud. de Dieu. His counterpart. ) for the woman is said to be opposite to or over against the man, because she responds to him. But the particle of similitude seems to me to be added because it is a form of speech taken from common usage. “Quia sit translatitia loquutio.” The Greek translators have faithfully rendered the sense, Κατ᾿’ αὐτόν; A help according to him. See Septuagint. and Jerome, “Which may be like him,” “Adjutorium simile sibi,” a help like himself. — Vulgate. Meet for him. “In whose company he shall take delight; so the Hebrew phrase, as before him, imports, being as much answerable to him, every way fitted for him, not only in likeness of body, but of mind, disposition, and affection, which laid the foundation of perpetual familiarity and friendship.” — Patrick. for Moses intended to note some equality. And hence is refitted the error of some, who think that the woman was formed only for the sake of propagation, and who restrict the word “good,” which had been lately mentioned, to the production of offspring. They do not think that a wife was personally necessary for Adam, because he was hitherto free from lust; as if she had been given to him only for the companion of his chamber, and not rather that she might be the inseparable associate of his life. Wherefore the particle כ ( caph ) is of importance, as intimating that marriage extends to all parts and usages of life. The explanation given by others, as if it were said, Let her be ready to obedience, is cold; for Moses intended to express more, as is manifest from what follows.

19. And out of the ground the Lord God formed, etc “Formaverat autem Deus,” — “God had formed,” plainly referring to what had already taken place. The Hebrew language has not the same distinction of times in its verbs which is common to more modern tongues.” — Ed. This is a more ample exposition of the preceding sentence, for he says that, of all the animals, when they had been placed in order, not one was found which might be conferred upon and adapted to Adam; nor was there such affinity of nature, that Adam could choose for himself a companion for life out of any one species. Nor did this occur through ignorance, for each species had passed in review before Adam, and he had imposed names upon them, not rashly but from certain knowledge; yet there was no just proportion between him and them. Therefore, unless a wife had been given him of the same kind with himself, he would have remained destitute of a suitable and proper help. Moreover, what is here said of God’s bringing the animals to Adam “Porro istud adducere Dei.” signifies nothing else than that he endued them with the disposition to obedience, so that they would voluntarily offer themselves to the man, in order that he, having closely inspected them, might distinguish them by appropriate names, agreeing with the nature of each. This gentleness towards man would have remained also in wild beasts, if Adam, by his defection from God, had not lost the authority he had before received. But now, from the time in which he began to be rebellious against God, he experienced the ferocity of brute animals against himself; for some are tamed with difficulty, others always remain unsubdued, and some, even of their own accord, inspire us with terror by their fierceness. Yet some remains of their former subjection continue to the present time, as we shall see in the second verse of the ninth chapter (Genesis 9:2.) Besides, it is to be remarked that Moses speaks only of those animals which approach the nearest to man, for the fishes live as in another world. As to the names which Adam imposed, I do not doubt that each of them was founded on the best reason; but their use, with many other good things, has become obsolete.

21. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall, etc. Although to profane persons this method of forming woman may seem ridiculous, and some of these may say that Moses is dealing in fables, yet to us the wonderful providence of God here shines forth; for, to the end that the conjunction of the human race might be the more sacred he purposed that both males and females should spring from one and the same origin. Therefore he created human nature in the person of Adam, and thence formed Eve, that the woman should be only a portion of the whole human race. This is the import of the words of Moses which we have had before, (Genesis 1:28,) “God created man... he made them male and female.” In this manner Adam was taught to recognize himself in his wife, as in a mirror; and Eve, in her turn, to submit herself willingly to her husband, as being taken out of him. But if the two sexes had proceeded from different sources, there would have been occasion either of mutual contempt, or envy, or contentions. And against what do perverse men here object? ‘The narration does not seem credible, since it is at variance with custom.’ As if, indeed, such an objection would have more color than one raised against the usual mode of the production of mankind, if the latter were not known by use and experience. “Ex putrido semine quotidie gigni homines.” But they object that either the rib which was taken from Adam had been superfluous, or that his body had been mutilated by the absence of the rib. To either of these it may be answered, that they find out a great absurdity. If, however, we should say that the rib out of which he would form another body had been prepared previously by the Creator of the world, I find nothing in this answer which is not in accordance with Divine Providence. Yet I am more in favor of a different conjecture, namely, that something was taken from Adam, in order that he might embrace, with greater benevolence, a part of himself. He lost, therefore, one of his ribs; but, instead of it, a far richer reward was granted him, since he obtained a faithful associate of life; for he now saw himself, who had before been imperfect, rendered complete in his wife. “Quum se integrum vidit in uxore, qui prius tantum dimidius erat.” And in this we see a true resemblance of our union with the Son of God; for he became weak that he might have members of his body endued with strength. In the meantime, it is to be noted, that Adam had been plunged in a sleep so profound, that he felt no pain; and further, that neither had the rupture been violent, nor was any want perceived of the lost rib, because God so filled up the vacuity with flesh, that his strength remained unimpaired; only the hardness of bone was removed. Moses also designedly used the word built , “Et aedificavit Jehova Deus costam quam tulerat ex Adam, in mulierem.” — And Jehovah God built the rib which he had taken out of Adam into a woman. ויבן, from בנה, to build. to teach us that in the person of the woman the human race was at length complete, which had before been like a building just begun. Others refer the expression to the domestic economy, as if Moses would say that legitimate family order was then instituted, which does not differ widely from the former exposition.

22. And brought her, etc Moses now relates that marriage was divinely instituted, which is especially useful to be known; for since Adam did not take a wife to himself at his own will, but received her as offered and appropriated to him by God, the sanctity of marriage hence more clearly appears, because we recognize God as its Author. The more Satan has endeavored to dishonor marriage, the more should we vindicate it from all reproach and abuse, that it may receive its due reverence. Thence it will follow that the children of God may embrace a conjugal life with a good and tranquil conscience, and husbands and wives may live together in chastity and honor. The artifice of Satan in attempting the defamation of marriage was twofold: first, that by means of the odium attached to it he might introduce the pestilential law of celibacy; and, secondly, that married persons might indulge themselves in whatever license they pleased. Therefore, by showing the dignity of marriage, we must remove superstition, lest it should in the slightest degree hinder the faithful from chastely using the lawful and pure ordinance of God; and further, we must oppose the lasciviousness of the flesh, in order that men may live modestly with their wives. But if no other reason influenced us, yet this alone ought to be abundantly sufficient, that unless we think and speak honorably of marriage, reproach is attached to its Author and Patron, for such God is here described as being by Moses.

23. And Adam said, etc It is demanded whence Adam derived this knowledge since he was at that time buried in deep sleep. If we say that his quickness of perception was then such as to enable him by conjecture to form a judgment, the solution would be weak. But we ought not to doubt that God would make the whole course of the affair manifest to him, either by secret revelation or by his word; for it was not from any necessity on God’s part that He borrowed from man the rib out of which he might form the woman; but he designed that they should be more closely joined together by this bonds which could not have been effected unless he had informed them of the fact. Moses does not indeed explain by what means God gave them this information; yet unless we would make the work of God superfluous, we must conclude that its Author revealed both the fact itself and the method and design of its accomplishment. The deep sleep was sent upon Adam, not to hide from him the origin of his wife, but to exempt him from pain and trouble, until he should receive a compensation so excellent for the loss of his rib.

This is now bone of, etc “Hac vice os est ex ossibus meis.” זאת הפעם, ( zot haphaam .) These words are rendered in the English version by “This now,” which very feebly and imperfectly expresses the sense of the original; nor does the version of Calvin, “At this turn,” give the true emphasis of the words. It is perhaps scarcely possible to do so without a paraphrase. The two words of the original are both intended to be emphatic. “This living creature (זאת) which at the present time (הפעם, hac vice ) passes before me, is the companion which I need, for it is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.” — Vide Dathe in loco. — Ed In using the expression הפעם ( hac vice ,) Adam indicates that something had been wanting to him; as if he had said, Now at length I have obtained a suitable companion, who is part of the substance of my flesh, and in whom I behold, as it were, another self. And he gives to his wife a name taken from that of man, “Nomen uxori a viro imponit.” אשה, ( ishah ,) from איש, ( ish ,) which is the Hebrew word man with a feminine termination; as if we should say, “She shall be called manness, because she was taken out of the man.” Calvin uses the word virissa; Dathe, after Le Clerc, the word vira; and though neither of them are strictly classical, yet are they far preferable to the term virago in the Vulgate, which Calvin justly rejects, and which means a woman of masculine character. The English word woman is a contraction of womb-man. — Ed that by this testimony and this mark he might transmit a perpetual memorial of the wisdom of God. A deficiency in the Latin language has compelled the ancient interpreter to render אשה ( ishah ,) by the word virago . It is, however, to be remarked, that the Hebrew term means nothing else than the female of the man.

24. Therefore shall a man leave It is doubted whether Moses here introduces God as speaking, or continues the discourse of Adam, or, indeed, has added this, in virtue of his office as teacher, in his own person. See Le Clerc on this verse, who takes the same view as Calvin. The last of these is that which I most approve. Therefore, after he has related historically what God had done, he also demonstrates the end of the divine institution. The sum of the whole is, that among the offices pertaining to human society, this is the principal, and as it were the most sacred, that a man should cleave unto his wife. And he amplifies this by a superadded comparison, that the husband ought to prefer his wife to his father. But the father is said to be left not because marriage severs sons from their fathers, or dispenses with other ties of nature, for in this way God would be acting contrary to himself. While, however, the piety of the son towards his father is to be most assiduously cultivated and ought in itself to be deemed inviolable and sacred, yet Moses so speaks of marriage as to show that it is less lawful to desert a wife than parents. Therefore, they who, for slight causes, rashly allow of divorces, violate, in one single particular, all the laws of nature, and reduce them to nothing. If we should make it a point of conscience not to separate a father from his son, it is a still greater wickedness to dissolve the bond which God has preferred to all others.

They shall be one flesh “Erunt in carnem unam.” — “In carne una.” — Vulgate. Εἰς σάρκα μίαν. — Sept. Although the ancient Latin interpreter has translated the passage ‘in one flesh,’ yet the Greek interpreters have expressed it more forcibly: ‘They two shall be into one flesh,’ and thus Christ cites the place in Matthew 19:5. But though here no mention is made of two , yet there is no ambiguity in the sense; for Moses had not said that God has assigned many wives, but only one to one man; and in the general direction given, he had put the wife in the singular number. It remains, therefore, that the conjugal bond subsists between two persons only, whence it easily appears, that nothing is less accordant with the divine institution than polygamy. Now, when Christ, in censuring the voluntary divorces of the Jews, adduces as his reason for doing it, that ‘it was not so in the beginning,’ (Matthew 19:5,) he certainly commands this institution to be observed as a perpetual rule of conduct. To the same point also Malachi recalls the Jews of his own time:

‘Did he not make them one from the beginning? and yet the Spirit was abounding in him.’ “Spiritus abundans in eo erat” The word abundans has in English the force of superabounding. — Ed (Malachi 2:15.)

Wherefore, there is no doubt that polygamy is a corruption of legitimate marriage.

25. They were both naked That the nakedness of men should be deemed indecorous and unsightly, while that of cattle has nothing disgraceful, seems little to agree with the dignity of human nature. We cannot behold a naked man without a sense of shame; yet at the sight of an ass, a dog, or an ox, no such feeling will be produced. Moreover, every one is ashamed of his own nakedness, even though other witnesses may not be present. Where then is that dignity in which we excel? The cause of this sense of shame, to which we are now alluding, Moses will show in the next chapter. He now esteems it enough to say, that in our uncorrupted nature, there was nothing but what was honorable; whence it follows, that whatsoever is opprobrious in us, must be imputed to our own fault, since our parents had nothing in themselves which was unbecoming until they were defiled with sin.

CHAPTER 3.

Genesis 3:1-24

1. Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

1. Porro serpens erat callidior omni bestia agri, quam fecerat Jehova Deus: et dixit ad mulierem, Etiamne dixit Deus, Non comedetis ex omni arbore horti?

2. And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

2. Et dixit mulier ad serpentem, De fructu arborum horti vescimur.

3. But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

3. At de fructu arboris quae est in medio horti, dixit Deus, Non comedetis ex ea, neque contingetis eam, ne forte moriamini.

4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

4. Tunc dixit serpens ad mulierem, Non moriendo moriemini.

5. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

5. Scit enim Deus quod in die qua comedeits ex ea, aperientur oculi vestri, et eritis sicut dii, scientes bonum et malum.

6. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

6. Et vidit mulier quod bona esset arbor ad vescendum, et quod delectabilis esset oculis, et desiderabilis arbor ad intelligendum: et tulit de fructu ipsius, et comedit: deditque etiam viro suo qui erat cum ea, et ipse comedit.

7. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

7. Et aperti sunt oculi amborumipsorum, et cognoverunt quod nudi essent: et consuerunt folia ficus, feceruntque sibi cingula.

8. And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

8. Audierunt autem vocem Jehovae Dei deambulantis per hortum ad auram diei: et abscondit se Adam et uxor ejus a facie Jehovae Dei, in medio arborum horti.

9. And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

9. Vocavitque Jehova Deus Adam, et dixit ei Ubi es tu?

10. And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

10. Et ait, Vocem tuam audivi in horto, et timui, quia nudus eram, et abscondi me.

11. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

11. Tunc dixit, Quis indicavit tibi quod nudus esses? nonne ex ipsa arbore de qua praeceperam tibi ne comederes, comedisti?

12. And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

12. Et ait Adam, Mulier quam dedisti ut esset mecum, ipsa dedit mihi de arbore, et comedi.

13. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

13. Dixitque Jehova Deus ad mulierem, Cur hoc fecisti? Et ait mulier, Serpens seduxit me, et comedi.

14. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

14. Et dixit Jehova ad serpentem, Quia fecisti hoc, maledicuts eris prae omni animali, et prae omni bestia agri: super ventrem tuum gradieris, et pulverem comedes omnibus diebus vitae tuae.

15. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

15. Et inimicitias ponam inter to et inter mulierem, et inter semen tuum et inter semen ejus: ipsum vulnerabit to in capite, et tu vulnerabis ipsum in calcaneo.

16. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

16. Ad mulierem dixit, Multiplicando multiplicabo dolorem tuum, et conceptum tuum: cum dolore paries filios, et ad virum tuum erit desiderium tuum, ipseque dominabitur tibi.

17. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

17. Adae vero ait, Quia paruisti voci uxoris tuae, et comedisti ex arbore de qua praeceperam tibi, dicens, Non comedes ex ea: maledicta terra propter to: in labore comedes eam cunctis diebus vitae tuae.

18. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

18. Et spinam et tribulum germinabit tibi, et comedes herbam agri.

19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art , and unto dust shalt thou return.

19. In sudore vultus tui vesceris pane, donec revertaris in terram: quia ex ea sumptus es: nam pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris.

20. And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

20. Et vocavit Adam nomen uxoris suae Hava, quia ipsa est mater omnis viventis.

21. Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

21. Fecitque Jehova Deus Adae et uxori ejus tunicas pelliceas, et induit eos.

22. And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

22. Tunc dixit Jehova Deus, Ecce, Adam factus est tanquam unus ex nobis, sciendo bonum et malum: nunc autem ne forte mittat manum suam, et accipiat etiam de arbore vitae, et comedat, et vivat in seculum.

23. Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

23. Et emisit eum Jehova de horto Heden, ad colendum terram ex qua sumptus fuerat.

24. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

24. Et ejecit Adam, et collocavit ab Oriente horti Heden cherubim, et laminam gladii versatilis, ad custodiendum viam arboris vitae.

CHAPTER 2

Ge 2:1. The Narrative of the Six Days' Creation Continued. The course of the narrative is improperly broken by the division of the chapter.

1. the heavens--the firmament or atmosphere.

host--a multitude, a numerous array, usually connected in Scripture with heaven only, but here with the earth also, meaning all that they contain.

were finished--brought to completion. No permanent change has ever since been made in the course of the world, no new species of animals been formed, no law of nature repealed or added to. They could have been finished in a moment as well as in six days, but the work of creation was gradual for the instruction of man, as well, perhaps, as of higher creatures (Job 38:7).

Ge 2:2-7. The First Sabbath.

2. and he rested on the seventh day--not to repose from exhaustion with labor (see Is 40:28), but ceased from working, an example equivalent to a command that we also should cease from labor of every kind.

3. blessed and sanctified the seventh day--a peculiar distinction put upon it above the other six days, and showing it was devoted to sacred purposes. The institution of the Sabbath is as old as creation, giving rise to that weekly division of time which prevailed in the earliest ages. It is a wise and beneficent law, affording that regular interval of rest which the physical nature of man and the animals employed in his service requires, and the neglect of which brings both to premature decay. Moreover, it secures an appointed season for religious worship, and if it was necessary in a state of primeval innocence, how much more so now, when mankind has a strong tendency to forget God and His claims?

4. These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth--the history or account of their production. Whence did Moses obtain this account so different from the puerile and absurd fictions of the heathen? Not from any human source, for man was not in existence to witness it; not from the light of nature or reason, for though they proclaim the eternal power and Godhead by the things which are made, they cannot tell how they were made. None but the Creator Himself could give this information, and therefore it is through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God (He 11:3).

5-6. rain, mist--(See on Ge 1:11).

7. Here the sacred writer supplies a few more particulars about the first pair.

formed--had FORMED MAN OUT OF THE DUST OF THE GROUND. Science has proved that the substance of his flesh, sinews, and bones, consists of the very same elements as the soil which forms the crust of the earth and the limestone that lies embedded in its bowels. But from that mean material what an admirable structure has been reared in the human body (Psa 139:14).

the breath of life--literally, of lives, not only animal but spiritual life. If the body is so admirable, how much more the soul with all its varied faculties.

breathed into his nostrils the breath of life--not that the Creator literally performed this act, but respiration being the medium and sign of life, this phrase is used to show that man's life originated in a different way from his body--being implanted directly by God (Ec 12:7), and hence in the new creation of the soul Christ breathed on His disciples (Joh 20:22).

Ge 8-17. The Garden of Eden.

8. Eden--was probably a very extensive region in Mesopotamia, distinguished for its natural beauty and the richness and variety of its produce. Hence its name, signifying "pleasantness." God planted a garden eastward, an extensive park, a paradise, in which the man was put to be trained under the paternal care of his Maker to piety and usefulness.

9. tree of life--so called from its symbolic character as a sign and seal of immortal life. Its prominent position where it must have been an object of daily observation and interest, was admirably fitted to keep man habitually in mind of God and futurity.

tree of the knowledge of good and evil--so called because it was a test of obedience by which our first parents were to be tried, whether they would be good or bad, obey God or break His commands.

15. put the man into the garden of Eden to dress it--not only to give him a pleasant employment, but to place him on his probation, and as the title of this garden, the garden of the Lord (Ge 13:10; Eze 28:13), indicates, it was in fact a temple in which he worshipped God, and was daily employed in offering the sacrifices of thanksgiving and praise.

17. thou shalt not eat of it ... thou shalt surely die--no reason assigned for the prohibition, but death was to be the punishment of disobedience. A positive command like this was not only the simplest and easiest, but the only trial to which their fidelity could be exposed.

Ge 2:18-25. The Making of Woman, and Institution of Marriage.

18. it is not good for the man to be alone--In the midst of plenty and delights, he was conscious of feelings he could not gratify. To make him sensible of his wants,

19. God brought unto Adam--not all the animals in existence, but those chiefly in his immediate neighborhood to be subservient to his use.

whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof--His powers of perception and intelligence were supernaturally enlarged to know the characters, habits, and uses of each species that was brought to him.

20. but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him--The design of this singular scene was to show him that none of the living creatures he saw were on an equal footing with himself, and that while each class came with its mate of the same nature, form, and habits, he alone had no companion. Besides, in giving names to them he was led to exercise his powers of speech and to prepare for social intercourse with his partner, a creature yet to be formed.

21. deep sleep--probably an ecstasy or trance like that of the prophets, when they had visions and revelations of the Lord, for the whole scene was probably visible to the mental eye of Adam, and hence his rapturous exclamation.

took one of his ribs--"She was not made out of his head to surpass him, nor from his feet to be trampled on, but from his side to be equal to him, and near his heart to be dear to him."

23. Woman--in Hebrew, "man-ess."

24. one flesh--The human pair differed from all other pairs, that by peculiar formation of Eve, they were one. And this passage is appealed to by our Lord as the divine institution of marriage (Mt 19:4, 5; Ep 5:28). Thus Adam appears as a creature formed after the image of God--showing his knowledge by giving names to the animals, his righteousness by his approval of the marriage relation, and his holiness by his principles and feelings, and finding gratification in the service and enjoyment of God.

And all the host of them - The word host signifies literally an army, composed of a number of companies of soldiers under their respective leaders; and seems here elegantly applied to the various celestial bodies in our system, placed by the Divine wisdom under the influence of the sun. From the original word צבא tsaba, a host, some suppose the Sabeans had their name, because of their paying Divine honors to the heavenly bodies. From the Septuagint version of this place, πας ὁ κοσμος αυτων, all their ornaments, we learn the true meaning of the word κοσμος, commonly translated world, which signifies a decorated or adorned whole or system. And this refers to the beautiful order, harmony, and regularity which subsist among the various parts of creation. This translation must impress the reader with a very favorable opinion of these ancient Greek translators; had they not examined the works of God with a philosophic eye, they never could have given this turn to the original.

On the Seventh day God ended, etc. - It is the general voice of Scripture that God finished the whole of the creation in six days, and rested the seventh! giving us an example that we might labor six days, and rest the seventh from all manual exercises. It is worthy of notice that the Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Samaritan, read the sixth day instead of the seventh; and this should be considered the genuine reading, which appears from these versions to have been originally that of the Hebrew text. How the word sixth became changed into seventh may be easily conceived from this circumstance. It is very likely that in ancient times all the numerals were signified by letters, and not by words at full length. This is the case in the most ancient Greek and Latin MSS., and in almost all the rabbinical writings. When these numeral letters became changed for words at full length, two letters nearly similar might be mistaken for each other; ו vau stands for six, ז zain for seven; how easy to mistake these letters for each other when writing the words at full length, and so give birth to the reading in question.

And God blessed the seventh day - The original word ברך barach, which is generally rendered to bless, has a very extensive meaning. It is frequently used in Scripture in the sense of speaking good of or to a person; and hence literally and properly rendered by the Septuagint ευλογησεν, from ευ, good or well, and λεγω, I speak. So God has spoken well of the Sabbath, and good to them who conscientiously observe it. Blessing is applied both to God and man: when God is said to bless, we generally understand by the expression that he communicates some good; but when man is said to bless God, we surely cannot imagine that he bestows any gifts or confers any benefit on his Maker. When God is said to bless, either in the Old or New Testament, it signifies his speaking good To man; and this comprises the whole of his exceeding great and precious promises. And when man is said to bless God, it ever implies that he speaks good Of him, for the giving and fulfillment of his promises. This observation will be of general use in considering the various places where the word occurs in the sacred writings. Reader, God blesses thee when by his promises he speaks good To thee; and thou dost bless him when, from a consciousness of his kindness to thy body and soul, thou art thankful to him, and speakest good of his name.

Because that in it he had rested - שבת shabath, he rested; hence Sabbath, the name of the seventh day, signifying a day of rest - rest to the body from labor and toil, and rest to the soul from all worldly care and anxieties. He who labors with his mind by worldly schemes and plans on the Sabbath day is as culpable as he who labors with his hands in his accustomed calling. It is by the authority of God that the Sabbath is set apart for rest and religious purposes, as the six days of the week are appointed for labor. How wise is this provision! It is essentially necessary, not only to the body of man, but to all the animals employed in his service: take this away and the labor is too great, both man and beast would fail under it. Without this consecrated day religion itself would fail, and the human mind, becoming sensualized, would soon forget its origin and end. Even as a political regulation, it is one of the wisest and most beneficent in its effects of any ever instituted. Those who habitually disregard its moral obligation are, to a man, not only good for nothing, but are wretched in themselves, a curse to society, and often end their lives miserably. See Clarke's note on Exo 20:8; See Clarke's note on Exo 23:12; See Clarke's note on Exo 24:16; and See Clarke's note on Exo 31:13; to which the reader is particularly desired to refer.

As God formed both the mind and body of man on principles of activity, so he assigned him proper employment; and it is his decree that the mind shall improve by exercise, and the body find increase of vigor and health in honest labor. He who idles away his time in the six days is equally culpable in the sight of God as he who works on the seventh. The idle person is ordinarily clothed with rags, and the Sabbath-breakers frequently come to an ignominious death. Reader, beware.

In the day that the Lord God made, etc. - The word יהוה Yehovah is for the first time mentioned here. What it signifies see the note on Exo 34:5, Exo 34:6. Wherever this word occurs in the sacred writings we translate it Lord, which word is, through respect and reverence, always printed in capitals. Though our English term Lord does not give the particular meaning of the original word, yet it conveys a strong and noble sense. Lord is a contraction of the Anglo-Saxon, Hlaford, afterwards written Loverd, and lastly Lord, from bread; hence our word loaf, and ford, to supply, to give out. The word, therefore, implies the giver of bread, i.e., he who deals out all the necessaries of life. Our ancient English noblemen were accustomed to keep a continual open house, where all their vassals, and all strangers, had full liberty to enter and eat as much as they would; and hence those noblemen had the honorable name of lords, i.e., the dispensers of bread. There are about three of the ancient nobility who still keep up this honorable custom, from which the very name of their nobility is derived. We have already seen, Gen 1:1, with what judgment our Saxon ancestors expressed Deus, the Supreme Being, by the term God; and we see the same judgment consulted by their use of the term Lord to express the word Dominus, by which terms the Vulgate version, which they used, expresses Elohim and Jehovah, which we translate Lord God. God is the good Being, and Lord is the dispenser of bread, the giver of every good and perfect gift, who liberally affords the bread that perisheth to every man, and has amply provided the bread that endures unto eternal life for every human soul. With what propriety then does this word apply to the Lord Jesus, who is emphatically called the bread of life; the bread of God which cometh down from heaven, and which is given for the life of the world! Joh 6:33, Joh 6:48, Joh 6:51. What a pity that this most impressive and instructive meaning of a word in such general use were not more extensively known, and more particularly regarded! See the postscript to the general preface. I know that Mr. H. Tooke has endeavored to render this derivation contemptible; but this has little weight with me. I have traced it through the most accredited writers in Saxony and on Saxon affairs, and I am satisfied that this and this only, is its proper etymology and derivation.

Every plant of the field before it was in the earth - It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.

There went up a mist - This passage appears to have greatly embarrassed many commentators. The plain meaning seems to be this, that the aqueous vapours, ascending from the earth, and becoming condensed in the colder regions of the atmosphere, fell back upon the earth in the form of dews, and by this means an equal portion of moisture was distributed to the roots of plants, etc. As Moses had said, Gen 2:5, that the Lord had not caused it to rain upon the earth, he probably designed to teach us, in Gen 2:6, how rain is produced, viz., by the condensation of the aqueous vapors, which are generally through the heat of the sun and other causes raised to a considerable height in the atmosphere, where, meeting with cold air, the watery particles which were before so small and light that they could float in the air, becoming condensed, i.e., many drops being driven into one, become too heavy to be any longer suspended, and then, through their own gravity, fall down in the form which we term rain.

God formed man of the dust - In the most distinct manner God shows us that man is a compound being, having a body and soul distinctly, and separately created; the body out of the dust of the earth, the soul immediately breathed from God himself. Does not this strongly mark that the soul and body are not the same thing? The body derives its origin from the earth, or as עפר aphar implies, the dust; hence because it is earthly it is decomposable and perishable. Of the soul it is said, God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; נשמת חיים nishmath chaiyim, the breath of Lives, i.e., animal and intellectual. While this breath of God expanded the lungs and set them in play, his inspiration gave both spirit and understanding.

A garden eastward in Eden - Though the word עדן Eden signifies pleasure or delight, it is certainly the name of a place. See Gen 4:16; 2Kgs 19:12; Isa 37:12; Eze 27:23; Amo 1:5. And such places probably received their name from their fertility, pleasant situation, etc. In this light the Septuagint have viewed it, as they render the passage thus: Εφυτευσεν ὁ Θεος παραδεισον εν Εδεν, God planted a paradise in Eden. Hence the word paradise has been introduced into the New Testament, and is generally used to signify a place of exquisite pleasure and delight. From this the ancient heathens borrowed their ideas of the gardens of the Hesperides, where the trees bore golden fruit; the gardens of Adonis, a word which is evidently derived from the Hebrew עדן Eden; and hence the origin of sacred gardens or enclosures dedicated to purposes of devotion, some comparatively innocent, others impure. The word paradise is not Greek; in Arabic and Persian it signifies a garden, a vineyard, and also the place of the blessed. The Mohammedans say that God created the Jennet al Ferdoos, the garden of paradise, from light, and the prophets and wise men ascend thither. Wilmet places it after the root farada, to separate, especially a person or place, for the purposes of devotion, but supposes it to be originally a Persian word, vox originis Persicae quam in sua lingua conservarunt Armeni. As it is a word of doubtful origin, its etymology is uncertain.

Every tree that is pleasant to the sight, etc. - If we take up these expressions literally, they may bear the following interpretation: the tree pleasant to the sight may mean every beautiful tree or plant which for shape, color, or fragrance, delights the senses, such as flowering shrubs, etc.

And good for food - All fruit-bearing trees, whether of the pulpy fruits, as apples, etc., or of the kernel or nut kind, such as dates, and nuts of different sorts, together with all esculent vegetables.

The tree of life - חיים chaiyim; of lives, or life-giving tree, every medicinal tree, herb, and plant, whose healing virtues are of great consequence to man in his present state, when through sin diseases of various kinds have seized on the human frame, and have commenced that process of dissolution which is to reduce the body to its primitive dust.

Yet by the use of these trees of life - those different vegetable medicines, the health of the body may be preserved for a time, and death kept at a distance. Though the exposition given here may be a general meaning for these general terms, yet it is likely that this tree of life which was placed in the midst of the garden was intended as an emblem of that life which man should ever live, provided he continued in obedience to his Maker. And probably the use of this tree was intended as the means of preserving the body of man in a state of continual vital energy, and an antidote against death. This seems strongly indicated from Gen 3:22.

And the tree of knowledge of good and evil - Considering this also in a merely literal point of view, it may mean any tree or plant which possessed the property of increasing the knowledge of what was in nature, as the esculent vegetables had of increasing bodily vigor; and that there are some ailments which from their physical influence have a tendency to strengthen the understanding and invigorate the rational faculty more than others, has been supposed by the wisest and best of men; yet here much more seems intended, but what is very difficult to be ascertained. Some very eminent men have contended that the passage should be understood allegorically! and that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil means simply that prudence, which is a mixture of knowledge, care, caution, and judgment, which was prescribed to regulate the whole of man's conduct. And it is certain that to know good and evil, in different parts of Scripture, means such knowledge and discretion as leads a man to understand what is fit and unfit, what is not proper to be done and what should be performed. But how could the acquisition of such a faculty be a sin? Or can we suppose that such a faculty could be wanting when man was in a state of perfection? To this it may be answered: The prohibition was intended to exercise this faculty in man that it should constantly teach him this moral lesson, that there were some things fit and others unfit to be done, and that in reference to this point the tree itself should be both a constant teacher and monitor. The eating of its fruit would not have increased this moral faculty, but the prohibition was intended to exercise the faculty he already possessed. There is certainly nothing unreasonable in this explanation, and viewed in this light the passage loses much of its obscurity. Vitringa, in his dissertation Deuteronomy arbore prudentiae in Paradiso, ejusque mysterio, strongly contends for this interpretation. See more on Gen 3:6 (note).

A river went out of Eden, etc. - It would astonish an ordinary reader, who should be obliged to consult different commentators and critics on the situation of the terrestrial Paradise, to see the vast variety of opinions by which they are divided. Some place it in the third heaven, others in the fourth; some within the orbit of the moon, others in the moon itself; some in the middle regions of the air, or beyond the earth's attraction; some on the earth, others under the earth, and others within the earth; some have fixed it at the north pole, others at the south; some in Tartary, some in China; some on the borders of the Ganges, some in the island of Ceylon; some in Armenia, others in Africa, under the equator; some in Mesopotamia, others in Syria, Persia, Arabia, Babylon, Assyria, and in Palestine; some have condescended to place it in Europe, and others have contended it either exists not, or is invisible, or is merely of a spiritual nature, and that the whole account is to be spiritually understood! That there was such a place once there is no reason to doubt; the description given by Moses is too particular and circumstantial to be capable of being understood in any spiritual or allegorical way. As well might we contend that the persons of Adam and Eve were allegorical, as that the place of their residence was such.

The most probable account of its situation is that given by Hadrian Reland. He supposes it to have been in Armenia, near the sources of the great rivers Euphrates, Tigris, Phasis, and Araxes. He thinks Pison was the Phasis, a river of Colchis, emptying itself into the Euxine Sea, where there is a city called Chabala, the pronunciation of which is nearly the same with that of Havilah, or חוילה Chavilah, according to the Hebrew, the vau ו being changed in Greek to beta β. This country was famous for gold, whence the fable of the Golden Fleece, attempted to be carried away from that country by the heroes of Greece. The Gihon he thinks to be the Araxes, which runs into the Caspian Sea, both the words having the same signification, viz., a rapid motion. The land of Cush, washed by the river, he supposes to be the country of the Cussaei of the ancients. The Hiddekel all agree to be the Tigris, and the other river Phrat, or פרת Perath, to be the Euphrates. All these rivers rise in the same tract of mountainous country, though they do not arise from one head.

There is bdellium (בדלח bedolach) and the onyx stone, אבן השהם eben hashshoham - Bochart thinks that the bedolach or bdellium means the pearl-oyster; and shoham is generally understood to mean the onyx, or species of agate, a precious stone which has its name from ονυξ a man's nail, to the color of which it nearly approaches. It is impossible to say what is the precise meaning of the original words; and at this distance of time and place it is of little consequence.

Put him into the garden - to dress it, and to keep it - Horticulture, or gardening, is the first kind of employment on record, and that in which man was engaged while in a state of perfection and innocence. Though the garden may be supposed to produce all things spontaneously, as the whole vegetable surface of the earth certainly did at the creation, yet dressing and tilling were afterwards necessary to maintain the different kinds of plants and vegetables in their perfection, and to repress luxuriance. Even in a state of innocence we cannot conceive it possible that man could have been happy if inactive. God gave him work to do, and his employment contributed to his happiness; for the structure of his body, as well as of his mind, plainly proves that he was never intended for a merely contemplative life.

Of the tree of the knowledge - thou shalt not eat - This is the first positive precept God gave to man; and it was given as a test of obedience, and a proof of his being in a dependent, probationary state. It was necessary that, while constituted lord of this lower world, he should know that he was only God's vicegerent, and must be accountable to him for the use of his mental and corporeal powers, and for the use he made of the different creatures put under his care. The man from whose mind the strong impression of this dependence and responsibility is erased, necessarily loses sight of his origin and end, and is capable of any species of wickedness. As God is sovereign, he has a right to give to his creatures what commands he thinks proper. An intelligent creature, without a law to regulate his conduct, is an absurdity; this would destroy at once the idea of his dependency and accountableness. Man must ever feel God as his sovereign, and act under his authority, which he cannot do unless he have a rule of conduct. This rule God gives: and it is no matter of what kind it is, as long as obedience to it is not beyond the powers of the creature who is to obey. God says: There is a certain fruit-bearing tree; thou shalt not eat of its fruit; but of all the other fruits, and they are all that are necessary, for thee, thou mayest freely, liberally eat. Had he not an absolute right to say so? And was not man bound to obey?

Thou shalt surely die - מות תמות moth tamuth; Literally, a death thou shalt die; or, dying thou shalt die. Thou shalt not only die spiritually, by losing the life of God, but from that moment thou shalt become mortal, and shalt continue in a dying state till thou die. This we find literally accomplished; every moment of man's life may be considered as an act of dying, till soul and body are separated. Other meanings have been given of this passage, but they are in general either fanciful or incorrect.

It is not good that the man should be alone - לבדו lebaddo; only himself. I will make him a help meet for him; עזר כנגדו ezer kenegdo, a help, a counterpart of himself, one formed from him, and a perfect resemblance of his person. If the word be rendered scrupulously literally, it signifies one like, or as himself, standing opposite to or before him. And this implies that the woman was to be a perfect resemblance of the man, possessing neither inferiority nor superiority, but being in all things like and equal to himself. As man was made a social creature, it was not proper that he should be alone; for to be alone, i.e. without a matrimonial companion, was not good. Hence we find that celibacy in general is a thing that is not good, whether it be on the side of the man or of the woman. Men may, in opposition to the declaration of God, call this a state of excellence and a state of perfection; but let them remember that the word of God says the reverse.

Out of the ground, etc. - Concerning the formation of the different kinds of animals, see the preceding chapter, Genesis 1 (note).

And Adam gave names to all cattle - Two things God appears to have had in view by causing man to name all the cattle, etc. 1. To show him with what comprehensive powers of mind his Maker had endued him; and 2. To show him that no creature yet formed could make him a suitable companion. And that this twofold purpose was answered we shall shortly see; for,

1. Adam gave names; but how? From an intimate knowledge of the nature and properties of each creature. Here we see the perfection of his knowledge; for it is well known that the names affixed to the different animals in Scripture always express some prominent feature and essential characteristic of the creatures to which they are applied. Had he not possessed an intuitive knowledge of the grand and distinguishing properties of those animals, he never could have given them such names. This one circumstance is a strong proof of the original perfection and excellence of man, while in a state of innocence; nor need we wonder at the account. Adam was the work of an infinitely wise and perfect Being, and the effect must resemble the cause that produced it.

2. Adam was convinced that none of these creatures could be a suitable companion for him, and that therefore he must continue in the state that was not good, or be a farther debtor to the bounty of his Maker; for among all the animals which he had named there was not found a help meet for him. Hence we read,

The Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, etc. - This was neither swoon nor ecstasy, but what our translation very properly terms a deep sleep.

And he took one of his ribs - It is immaterial whether we render צלע tsela a rib, or a part of his side, for it may mean either: some part of man was to be used on the occasion, whether bone or flesh it matters not; though it is likely, from verse Gen 2:23, that a part of both was taken; for Adam, knowing how the woman was formed, said, This is flesh of my flesh, and bone of my bone. God could have formed the woman out of the dust of the earth, as he had formed the man; but had he done so, she must have appeared in his eyes as a distinct being, to whom he had no natural relation. But as God formed her out of a part of the man himself, he saw she was of the same nature, the same identical flesh and blood, and of the same constitution in all respects, and consequently having equal powers, faculties, and rights. This at once ensured his affection, and excited his esteem.

Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, etc. - There is a very delicate and expressive meaning in the original which does not appear in our version. When the different genera of creatures were brought to Adam, that he might assign them their proper names, it is probable that they passed in pairs before him, and as they passed received their names. To this circumstance the words in this place seem to refer. Instead of this now is זאת הפאם zoth happaam, we should render more literally this turn, this creature, which now passes or appears before me, is flesh of my flesh, etc. The creatures that had passed already before him were not suitable to him, and therefore it was said, For Adam there was not a help meet found, Gen 2:20; but when the woman came, formed out of himself, he felt all that attraction which consanguinity could produce, and at the same time saw that she was in her person and in her mind every way suitable to be his companion. See Parkhurst, sub voce.

She shall be called Woman - A literal version of the Hebrew would appear strange, and yet a literal version is the only proper one. איש ish signifies man, and the word used to express what we term woman is the same with a feminine termination, אשה ishshah, and literally means she-man. Most of the ancient versions have felt the force of the term, and have endeavored to express it as literally as possible. The intelligent reader will not regret to see some of them here. The Vulgate Latin renders the Hebrew virago, which is a feminine form of vir, a man. Symmachus uses ανδρις, andris, a female form of ανηρ, aner, a man. Our own term is equally proper when understood. Woman has been defined by many as compounded of wo and man, as if called man's wo because she tempted him to eat the forbidden fruit; but this is no meaning of the original word, nor could it be intended, as the transgression was not then committed. The truth is, our term is a proper and literal translation of the original, and we may thank the discernment of our Anglo-Saxon ancestors for giving it. The Anglo-Saxon word, of which woman is a contraction, means the man with the womb. A very appropriate version of the Hebrew אשה ishshah, rendered by terms which signify she-man, in the versions already specified. Hence we see the propriety of Adam's observation: This creature is flesh of my flesh, and bone of my bones; therefore shall she be called Womb-Man, or female man, because she was taken out of man. See Verstegan. Others derive it from the Anglo-Saxon words for man's wife or she-man. Either may be proper, the first seems the most likely.

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother - There shall be, by the order of God, a more intimate connection formed between the man and woman, than can subsist even between parents and children.

And they shall be one flesh - These words may be understood in a twofold sense.

1. These two shall be one flesh, shall be considered as one body, having no separate or independent rights, privileges, cares, concerns, etc., each being equally interested in all things that concern the marriage state.

2. These two shall be for the production of one flesh; from their union a posterity shall spring, as exactly resembling themselves as they do each other.

Our Lord quotes these words, Mat 19:5, with some variation from this text: They Twain shall be one flesh. So in Mar 10:8. St. Paul quotes in the same way, 1Cor 6:16, and in Eph 5:31. The Vulgate Latin, the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Samaritan, all read the word Two. That this is the genuine reading I have no doubt. The word שניהם sheneyhem, they two or both of them, was, I suppose, omitted at first from the Hebrew text, by mistake, because it occurs three words after in the following verse, or more probably it originally occurred in Gen 2:24, and not in Gen 2:25; and a copyist having found that he had written it twice, in correcting his copy, struck out the word in Gen 2:24 instead of Gen 2:25. But of what consequence is it? In the controversy concerning polygamy, it has been made of very great consequence. Without the word, some have contended a man may have as many wives as he chooses, as the terms are indefinite, They shall be, etc., but with the word, marriage is restricted. A man can have in legal wedlock but One wife at the same time.

We have here the first institution of marriage, and we see in it several particulars worthy of our most serious regard.

1. God pronounces the state of celibacy to be a bad state, or, if the reader please, not a good one; and the Lord God said, It is not good for man to be alone. This is God's judgment. Councils, and fathers, and doctors, and synods, have given a different judgment; but on such a subject they are worthy of no attention. The word of God abideth for ever.

2. God made the woman for the man, and thus he has shown us that every son of Adam should be united to a daughter of Eve to the end of the world. See on 1Cor 7:3 (note). God made the woman out of the man, to intimate that the closest union, and the most affectionate attachment, should subsist in the matrimonial connection, so that the man should ever consider and treat the woman as a part of himself: and as no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and supports it, so should a man deal with his wife; and on the other hand the woman should consider that the man was not made for her, but that she was made for the man, and derived, under God, her being from him; therefore the wife should see that she reverence her husband, Eph 5:33. Gen 2:23, Gen 2:24 contain the very words of the marriage ceremony: This is flesh of my flesh, and bone of my bone, therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. How happy must such a state be where God's institution is properly regarded, where the parties are married, as the apostle expresses it, in the Lord; where each, by acts of the tenderest kindness, lives only to prevent the wishes and contribute in every possible way to the comfort and happiness of the other! Marriage might still be what it was in its original institution, pure and suitable; and in its first exercise, affectionate and happy; but how few such marriages are there to be found! Passion, turbulent and irregular, not religion; custom, founded by these irregularities, not reason; worldly prospects, originating and ending in selfishness and earthly affections, not in spiritual ends, are the grand producing causes of the great majority of matrimonial alliances. How then can such turbid and bitter fountains send forth pure and sweet waters? See the ancient allegory of Cupid and Psyche, by which marriage is so happily illustrated, explained in the notes on Mat 19:4-6.

They were both naked, etc. - The weather was perfectly temperate, and therefore they had no need of clothing, the circumambient air being of the same temperature with their bodies. And as sin had not yet entered into the world, and no part of the human body had been put to any improper use, therefore there was no shame, for shame can only arise from a consciousness of sinful or irregular conduct.

Even in a state of innocence, when all was perfection and excellence, when God was clearly discovered in all his works, every place being his temple, every moment a time of worship, and every object an incitement to religious reverence and adoration - even then, God chose to consecrate a seventh part of time to his more especial worship, and to hallow it unto his own service by a perpetual decree. Who then shall dare to reverse this order of God? Had the religious observance of the Sabbath been never proclaimed till the proclamation of the law on Mount Sinai, then it might have been conjectured that this, like several other ordinances, was a shadow which must pass away with that dispensation; neither extending to future ages, nor binding on any other people. But this was not so. God gave the Sabbath, his first ordinance, to man, (see the first precept, Gen 2:17), while all the nations of the world were seminally included in him, and while he stood the father and representative of the whole human race; therefore the Sabbath is not for one nation, for one time, or for one place. It is the fair type of heaven's eternal day - of the state of endless blessedness and glory, where human souls, having fully regained the Divine image, and become united to the Centre and Source of all perfection and excellence, shall rest in God, unutterably happy through the immeasurable progress of duration! Of this consummation every returning Sabbath should at once be a type, a remembrancer, and a foretaste, to every pious mind; and these it must be to all who are taught of God.

Of this rest, the garden of Eden, that paradise of God formed for man, appears also to have been a type and pledge; and the institution of marriage, the cause, bond, and cement of the social state, was probably designed to prefigure that harmony, order, and blessedness which must reign in the kingdom of God, of which the condition of our first parents in the garden of paradise is justly supposed to have been an expressive emblem. What a pity that this heavenly institution should have ever been perverted! that, instead of becoming a sovereign help to all, it is now, through its prostitution to animal and secular purposes, become the destroyer of millions! Reader, every connection thou formest in life will have a strong and sovereign influence on thy future destiny. Beware! an unholy cause, which from its peculiar nature must be ceaselessly active in every muscle, nerve, and passion, cannot fail to produce incessant effects of sin, misery, death, and perdition. Remember that thy earthly connections, no matter of what kind, are not formed merely for time, whatsoever thou mayest intend, but also for eternity. With what caution there fore shouldst thou take every step in the path of life! On this ground, the observations made in the preceding notes are seriously recommended to thy consideration.

We have here, (1.) The settlement of the kingdom of nature, in God's resting from the work of creation, Ge 2:1,2. Where observe, 1. That the creatures made both in heaven and earth, are the hosts or armies of them, which speaks them numerous, but marshalled, disciplined, and under command. God useth them as his hosts for the defence of his people, and the destruction of his enemies. 2. That the heavens and the earth are finished pieces, and so are all the creatures in them. So perfect is God's work that nothing can be added to it or taken from it, Eccl 3:14. 3. That after the end of the first six days, God ceased from all work of creation. He hath so ended his work, as that though in his providence he worketh hitherto, John 5:17. preserving and governing all the creatures, yet he doth not make any new species of creatures. 4. That the eternal God, tho' infinitely happy in himself, yet took a satisfaction in the work of his own hands. He did not rest as one weary, but as one well - pleased with the instances of his own goodness. (2.) The commencement of the kingdom of grace, in the sanctification of the sabbath day, Ge 2:3. He rested on that day, and took a complacency in his creatures, and then sanctified it, and appointed us on that day to rest and take a complacency in the Creator; and his rest is in the fourth commandment made a reason for ours after six days labour. Observe, 1. That the solemn observation of one day in seven as a day of holy rest, and holy work, is the indispensible duty of all those to whom God has revealed his holy sabbaths. 2. That sabbaths are as ancient as the world. 3. That the sabbath of the Lord is truly honourable, and we have reason to honour it; honour it for the sake of its antiquity, its great author, and the sanctification of the first sabbath by the holy God himself, and in obedience to him, by our first parents in innocency.

In these verses, 1. Here is a name given to the Creator, which we have not yet met with, Jehovah. The LORD in capital letters, is constantly used in our English translation, for Jehovah. This is that great and incommunicable name of God, which speaks his having his being of himself, and his giving being to all things. It properly means, He that was, and that is, and that is to come. 2. Further notice taken of the production of plants and herbs, because they were made to be food for man. 3. A more particular account of the creation of man, Ge 2:7. Man is a little world, consisting of heaven and earth, soul and body. Here we have all account of the original of both, and the putting of both together: The Lord God, the great fountain of being and power, formed man. Of the other creatures it is said, they were created and made; but of man, that he was formed, which notes a gradual process in the work with great accuracy and exactness. To express the creation of this new thing, he takes a new word: a word (some think) borrowed from the potter's forming his vessel upon the wheel. The body of man is curiously wrought. And the soul takes its rise from the breath of heaven. It came immediately from God; he gave it to be put into the body, Eccl 12:7 as afterwards he gave the tables of stone of his own writing to be put into the ark. 'Tis by it that man is a living soul, that is, a living man. The body would be a worthless, useless carcase, if the soul did not animate it.

Man consisting of body and soul, a body made out of the earth, and a rational immortal soul, we have in these verses the provision that was made for the happiness of both. That part of man, which is allied to the world of sense, was made happy, for he was put in the paradise of God; that part which is allied to the world of spirits was well provided for, for he was taken into covenant with God. Here we have, A description of the garden of Eden, which was intended for the palace of this prince. The inspired penman in this history writing for the Jews first, and calculating his narratives from the infant state of the church, describes things by their outward sensible appearances, and leaves us, by farther discoveries of the divine light, to be led into the understanding of the mysteries couched under them. Therefore he doth not so much insist upon the happiness of Adam's mind, as upon that of his outward estate. The Mosaic history, as well as the Mosaic law, has rather the patterns of heavenly things, than the heavenly things themselves, Heb 9:23. Observe, (1.) The place appointed for Adam's residence was a garden; not an ivory house. As clothes came in with sin, so did houses. The heaven was the roof of Adam's house, and never was any roof so curiously cieled and painted: the earth was his floor, and never was any floor so richly inlaid: the shadow of the trees was his retirement, and never were any rooms so finely hung: Solomon's in all their glory were not arrayed like them. (2.) The contrivance and furniture of this garden was the immediate work of God's wisdom and power. The Lord God planted this garden, that is, he had planted it, upon the third day when the fruits of the earth were made. We may well suppose it to be the most accomplished place that ever the sun saw, when the All - sufficient God himself designed it to be the present happiness of his beloved creature. (3.) The situation of this garden was extremely sweet; it was in Eden, which signifies delight and pleasure. The place is here particularly pointed out by such marks and bounds as were sufficient when Moses wrote, to specify the place to those who knew that country; but now it seems the curious cannot satisfy themselves concerning it. Let it be our care to make sure a place in the heavenly paradise, and then we need not perplex ourselves with a search after the place of the earthly paradise. (4.) The trees wherewith this garden was planted. [1.] It had all the best and choicest trees in common with the rest of the ground. It was beautified with every tree that was pleasant to the sight - It was enriched with every tree that yielded fruit grateful to the taste, and useful to the body. But, [2.] It had two extraordinary trees peculiar to itself, on earth there were not their like. 1. There was the tree of life in the midst of the garden - Which was not so much a natural means to preserve or prolong life; but was chiefly intended to be a sign to Adam, assuring him of the continuance of life and happiness upon condition of his perseverance in innocency and obedience. 2. There was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil - So called, not because it had any virtue to beget useful knowledge, but because there was an express revelation of the will of God concerning this tree, so that by it he might know good and evil. What is good? It is good not to eat of this tree: what is evil? To eat of this tree. The distinction between all other moral good and evil was written in the heart of man; but this, which resulted from a positive law, was written upon this tree. And in the event it proved to give Adam an experimental knowledge of good by the loss of it, and of evil by the sense of it. (5.) The rivers wherewith this garden was watered, Ge 2:10 - 14. These four rivers, (or one river branched into four streams) contributed much both to the pleasantness and the fruitfulness of this garden. Hiddekel and Euphrates are rivers of Babylon. Havilah had gold and spices and precious stones; but Eden had that which was infinitely better, the tree of life, and communion with God. The command which God gave to man in innocency, and the covenant he than took him into. Hither we have seen God; man's powerful Creator, and his bountiful benefactor; now he appears as his ruler and lawgiver.

Thou shall die - That is, thou shalt lose all the happiness thou hast either in possession or prospect; and thou shalt become liable to death, and all the miseries that preface and attend it. This was threatened as the immediate consequence of sin. In the day thou eatest, thou shalt die - Not only thou shalt become mortal, but spiritual death and the forerunners of temporal death shall immediately seize thee.

It is not good that man - This man, should be alone - Though there was an upper world of angels, and a lower world of brutes, yet there being none of the same rank of beings with himself, he might be truly said to be alone. And every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air God brought to Adam - Either by the ministry of angels, or by a special instinct that he might name them, and so might give a proof of his knowledge, the names he gave them being expressive of their inmost natures.

This was done upon the sixth day, as was also the placing of Adam in paradise, though it be here mentioned after an account of the seventh day's rest: but what was said in general, Ge 1:27, that God made man male and female is more distinctly related here, God caused the sleep to fall on Adam, and made it a deep sleep, that so the opening of his side might be no grievance to him: while he knows no sin, God will take care he shall feel no pain.

And Adam said, this is now bone of my bones - Probably it was revealed to Adam in a vision, when he was asleep, that this lovely creature, now presented to him, was a piece of himself and was to be his companion, and the wife of his covenant - In token of his acceptance of her, he gave her a name, not peculiar to her, but common to her sex; she shall be called woman, Isha, a She - man, differing from man in sex only, not in nature; made of man, and joined to man.

The sabbath and marriage were two ordinances instituted in innocency, the former for the preservation of the church, the latter for the preservation of mankind. It appears by Mt 19:4,5, that it was God himself who said here, a man must leave all his relations to cleave to his wife; but whether he spake it by Moses or by Adam who spake, Ge 2:23 is uncertain: It should seem they are the words of Adam in God's name, laying down this law to all his posterity. The virtue of a divine ordinance, and the bonds of it, are stronger even than those of nature. See how necessary it is that children should take their parents consent with them in their marriage; and how unjust they are to their parents, as well as undutiful, if they marry without it; for they rob them of their right to them, and interest in them, and alienate it to another fraudulently and unnaturally.

They were both naked, they needed no cloaths for defence against cold or heat, for neither could be injurious to them: they needed none for ornament. Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Nay, they needed none for decency, they were naked, and had no reason to be ashamed. They knew not what shame was, so the Chaldee reads it. Blushing is now the colour of virtue, but it was not the colour of innocency.

1. THus the Heavens and the Earth were finished, and all the Host of them .

All the Creatures in Heaven and Earth are called their Hosts, for their multitude, variety, order, power, and subjection to the Lord of Hosts. Particularly the Host of Heaven in Scripture (which is its own best interpreter) signifies both, the Stars, as Deut. 4. 19. & 17. 3. Esa. 34. 4. and the Angels, as 1 Kings 22. 9. 2 Chron. 18. 18. Luke 2. 13. Who from these words appear to have been Created within the compass of the first six days, which also is probable from Col. 1. 16, 17. But it is no wonder that the Scripture saith so little concerning Angels, because it was written for the use of men, not of Angels, and God would hereby take us off from curious and impertinent speculations, and teach us to employ our thoughts about necessary and useful things.

Marginal references: Psal. 3. 6.

2. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: And he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

Or rather had ended or finished, for so the Hebrew word may be rendred, as all the Learned know, and so it must be rendred, else it doth not agree with the former chapter, which expresly saith, that all these works were done within six days.

Not for his own need and refreshment, for he is never weary, Esa. 40. 28. But for our example and instruction, that we might keep that day as a day of Religious rest.

Marginal references: Exod. 20. 11. 31. 17. Deut. 5. 14. Heb. 4. 4.

3. And God Blessed the seventh day , and sanctified it : because that in it he had rested from all his Work , which God Created and made .

By conferring special Honours and Priviledges upon it above all other days, that it should be a day of solemn rest and rejoycing and celebration of God and his Works, and a day of Gods bestowing singular, and the best blessings upon his Servants and Worshippers.

Separated it from common use and worldly employments, and consecrated it to the Worship of God, that it should be accounted an Holy day, and spent in Holy works and solemn exercises of Religion. Some conceive that the Sabbath was not actually blessed and sanctified at and from this time, but only in the days of Moses, which they pretend to be here related by way of anticipation. But this opinion hath no foundation in the Text or context, but rather is confuted from them: for as soon as the sacred Penman had said that God had ended his work and rested, &c, he adds immediately in words of the same tense, that God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. And if we compare this place with Exod. 20. we shall find that Moses there speaks of Gods blessing and sanctifying of the Sabbath, not as an action then first done, but as that which God had done formerly upon the Creation of the World, to the end that men might celebrate the praises of God for that glorious work, which as it was agreeable to the state of innocency, so was it no less proper and necessary a duty for the first ages of the World after the fall, than it was for the days of Moses and for the succeeding Generations.

Because he would have the memory of that glorious work of Creation, from which he then rested, preserved though all Generations.

Either 1. Created in making, i. e. made by way of Creation. Or rather, 2. Created out of nothing, and afterwards out of that Created matter made or formed divers things, as the Beasts out of the Earth, the Fishes out of the Water. He useth these two words, possibly to shew that Gods Wisdom, Power and Goodness, was manifest not only in that which he brought out of meer nothing, but also in those things which he wrought out of matter altogether unfit for so great works.

Marginal references: Heb. Created to make. Josh. 22. 26. Heb.

4. ¶ These are the Generations of the Heavens, and of the Earth, when they were Created, in the day that the LORD God made the Earth and the Heavens.

i. e. These things mentioned in the 1. chap.

i. e. A true and full relation of their Generations, i. e. Of their Original, or Beginnings.

Not strictly so called but largely taken for the time, as it is v. 17. Ruth 4. 5. Luk. 19. 42. 2 Cor. 6. 2.

5. And every Plant of the Field, before it was in the Earth , and every Herb of the Field before it grew : for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the Earth, and there was not a man to till the ground .

i. e. When as yet there were no Plants nor so much as Seeds of them there.

To wit, out of the Earth, as afterwards they did by Gods appointment.

The two great means of the growth of Plants and Herbs, viz. Rain from Heaven, and the labour of Man, were both lacking, to shew that they were now brought forth by Gods Almighty power and word.

6. But there went up a mist from the Earth, and watered the whole face of the ground .

To wit, from time to time by Gods appointment.

Or, Vapour, or, Cloud, which going up into the Air, was turned into [illegible: 1+ letters]ain, and fell down again to the Earth from whence it arose.

Whereby the Earth was softned and disposed both to the nourishment of those Plants or Trees that were Created, and to the production of new Plants in a natural and ordinary way. But these words may be otherwise understood, the Copulative, and, here rendred but, being put for the Disjunctive, or, as it is Exod. 21. 15, 17. Iob 6. 22. and 8. 3. and in other places. Or, the Negative particle, not, may be understood out of the foregoing clause as it is usual in the Hebrew Language, as Psal. 1. 5. and 9. 17. and 44. 19. and 50. 8. and Isa. 28. 27, 28. And so these words may be joyned with the foregoing, and both Translated in this manner, There was no Rain, nor a Man to Till the ground, or, (or, nor, for both come to one thing) so much as a mist which went up from the Earth, and watered (as afterwards was usual and natural) the whole face of the ground.

Marginal references: Or, a mist which went up from, &c.

7. And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of Life : and Man became a living Soul .

And by that door into the Head and whole man. This is an emphatical phrase, sufficiently implying that the Soul of Man was of a quite differing Nature and higher extraction and original than the Souls of Beasts, which together with their Bodies are said to be brought forth by the Earth, Genesis 1. 24.

Heb. Of Lives: Either to shew the continuance of this breath or soul both in this Life, and in the Life to come; or to note the various degrees or kinds of Life, which this one breath worketh in us, the Life of Plants, in growth and nourishment; the Life of Beasts, in sense and motion; and the Life of a Man, in Reason and Understanding.

Who before this was but a dull lump of Clay, or a comely Statue.

i. e. A living Man: The Soul being oft put for the whole Man, as Gen. 12. 5. 13. and 46. 15, 18. 1 Pet. 3. 20. &c.

Marginal references: Heb. dust of the ground.; 1 Cor. 15. 47.; 1 Cor. 15. 45.

8. And the LORD God Planted a Garden East-ward in Eden : And there he put the man whom he had formed .

Or, had planted, viz. on the third day, when he made the Plants and Trees to grow out of the ground.

A place of the choicest Plants and Fruits, most beautiful and pleasant.

From the place where Moses writ and the Israelites afterwards dwelt.

Eden here is the name of a place, not that Eden near Damascus in Syria, of which see Amos 1. 5. but another Eden in Mesopotamia or Chaldea, of which see Gen. 4. 16. 2 King. 19. 12. Esa. 37. 12. Ezek. 27. 23. There are many and tedious disputes about the place of this Paradise: of which he that listeth may see my Latin Synopsis. It may suffice to know that which is evident, that it was in or near to Mesopotamia, in the confluence of Euphrates and Tigris.

To wit, in another place.

9. And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every Tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for Food, the Tree of Life also in the midst of the Garden , and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil .

So called either symbolically, and sacramentally because it was a sign and seal of that Life which man had received from God, and of his continual enjoyment of it upon condition of his Obedience: Or, effectively, because God had planted in it a singular vertue for the support of Nature, prolongation of Life, and the prevention of all Diseases, Infirmities and decays through age.

Or, within the Garden, as Tyrus is said to be in the midst of the Seas, Ezek. 28. 2. Though it was but just within it.

So called with respect, either, 1. To God, who thereby would prove and make known mans Good or Evil, his Obedience and Happiness, or his Rebellion and Misery. Or rather, 2. To Man, who by the use of it would know to his cost, how great and good things he did enjoy and might have kept by his Obedience, and how evil and bitter the fruits of his disobedience were to himself and all his posterity. So it seems to be an ironical denomination, you thirsted after more knowledge, which also the Devil promised you, and you have got what you desired, more Knowledge, even dear bought experience.

10. And a River went out of Eden to water the Garden, and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads .

Or, Rivers, by a common Enallage.

The Country in which Paradise was; where those Rivers either arose from one spring, or met together in one channel.

(i. e.) From the Garden.

It was divided into four principal Rivers. Concerning which there are now many disputes. But it is no wonder if the rise and scituation of these Rivers be not now certainly known, because of the great changes, which in so long time might happen in this, as well as in other Rivers, partly by Earth-quakes, and principally by the general Deluge. And yet Euphrates and Tigris, the chief of these Rivers, whereof the other two are branches, are discovered by some learned men, to have one and the same original or spring, and that in a most pleasant part of Armenia, where they conceive Paradise was. See my Latin Synopsis.

11. The name of the first is Pison ; that is it which compasseth the whole Land of Havilah , where there is Gold.

An eminent branch of the River Tigris, probably that called by others Pasi-tigris, or Piso-tigris.

i. e. With many windings and turnings passed thorough; as this word is used, Ios. 15. 3. Mat. 23. 15.

Either that which is in those parts of Arabia which is towards Mesopotamia, so called from Havilah the issue of Cham, Gen. 10. 7. Or that which is nigh Persia and in the borders of India, so called from another Havilah of the Posterity of Sem, Gen. 10. 29. To either of these the following description agrees well.

12. And the Gold of that Land is good , there is Bdellium , and the Onyx stone .

i. e. Better than ordinary.

Which signifies either a pretious gumme, of which see Numb. 11. 70. or Gems and Pearls. Once for all observe, that many of the Hebrew words or names of Stones, Trees, Birds, and Beasts are even to the Hebrew Doctors and others both antient and modern Interpreters of uncertain signification, and that without any considerable inconvenience to us who are free from the obligations, which the Jews were formerly under of procuring such stones, and abstaining in their Diet from such Beasts and Birds, as then were sufficiently known to them; and if any were doubtful, they had one safe course, to abstain from them.

A kind of pretious stone; of which see Exod. 25. 7. and 28. 9, 20.

Marginal references: 2 Chron. 3. 5.

13. And the name of the second River is Gihon : The same is it that compasseth the whole Land of Ethiopia .

Not that River in the Land of Israel so called, 1 King. 1. 33. 2 Chron. 32. 30. But another of the same name, which in Hebrew signifies, the branch of a greater River: Here it is a branch either of Euphrates, as most think, or of Tigris, as some late Writers conceive.

Not that Countrey in Africa above Aegypt, commonly so called, but either Arabia, which in Scripture is frequently called Cush or Ethiopia. Of which see the notes upon 2 King: 19. 9. Iob 28. 19. Ezek. 29. 10. and 30. 8, 9. Hab. 3. 7. or rather a Countrey adjoyning to India, and Persia, with which Cush is joyned, Ezek. 38. 5. See also Esa. 11. 11. and Ezek. 27. 10. And about which place the Ethiopians are seated by Herod. l. 7. Homer, He[illegible: 1+ letters]iod, and others. Of which see my Latin Synopsis.

Marginal references: C[illegible: 1+ letters]sh.

14. And the name of the third River is Hiddekel : That is it which goeth toward the East of Assyria. And the fourth River is Euphrates.

(i. e.) Tigris, or an eminent branch of it. See Dan. 10. 4.

Marginal references: Or, Eastward to Assyria.

15. And the LORD God took the Man, and put him into the Garden of Eden, to dress it , and to keep it .

(i. e.) Commanded and enclined him to go.

(i. e.) To prune, dress, and order the Trees and Herbs of it.

From the annoyance of Beasts, which being unreasonable Creatures, and allowed the use of Herbs, might easily spoil the beauty of it.

Marginal references: Or, Adam.; Or, till. See Chap. 3. 23.

16. And the LORD God commanded the Man , saying, of every Tree of the Garden thou mayest freely eat :

And the Woman too (as appears both from the permission for eating Herbs and Fruits given to her, together with her Husband, Gen. 1. 28, 29. and from Gen. 3. 1, 2, 3. and from Eves punishment) and that either immediately, or by Adam whom God enjoyned to inform her thereof.

Without offence to me, or nutt to thy self. The words in Hebrew have the form of a command, but are only a permission or indulgence, as 1 Cor. 10. 25, 27.

Marginal references: Heb. Eating thou shalt eat.

17. But of the Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: For in the day in which thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely dye .

With a threefold death. 1. Spiritual by the guilt and power of sin, at that instant thou shalt be dead in trespasses and sins, Eph. 2. 1. 2. Temporal, or the death of the Body which shall then begin in thee, by decayes, infirmities, terrors, dangers, and other harbingers of death. 3. Eternal, which shall immediately succeed the other.

Marginal references: Heb. dying thou shalt dye.

18. And the LORD God said , It is not good , that the man should be alone: I will make him an help meet for him .

Or, Had said, to wit, upon the sixth day, on which the Woman was made, Gen. 1. 27, 28.

Not convenient either for my purpose of the increase of mankind, or for mans personal comfort, or for the propagation of his kind.

A most emphatical phrase signifying thus much, one correspondent to him, suitable both to his nature and necessity, one altogether like to him in shape and constitution, disposition and affection, a second self; or one to be at hand and near to him, to stand continually before him, familiarly to converse with him, to be always ready to succour, serve, and comfort him; or, one whose eye, respect, and care, as well as desire, (Gen. 3. 16.) should be to him, whose business it shall be to please and help him.

Marginal references: Heb, as before him, or, as it were comparable to him, Is. 40. 1[illegible: 1+ letters].

19. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every Beast of the Field, and every Fowl of the Air, and brought them unto Adam , to see what he would call them: And whatsoever Adam called every living Creature, that was the name thereof .

Either by Winds, or Angels, or by his own secret instinct, by which Storks, and Cranes, and Swallows change their places with the season.

Partly to own their subjection to him; partly that man, being recreated with their prospect, might adore and praise the Maker of them, and withall be sensible of his want of a meet companion, and so the better prepared to receive Gods mercy therein; and partly for the reason here following.

Or, make a discovery, not to God, who knew it already, but to all future Generations, who would hereby understand the deep wisdom and knowledge of their first Parent.

To wit, in the primitive or Hebrew Language. And this was done for the manifestation both of mans Dominion over the Creatures, and of the largeness of his understanding; it being an act of authority to give names, and an effect of vast knowledge to give convenient names to all the Creatures, which supposeth an exact acquaintance with their Natures.

Marginal references: Or, the Man.; Heb. living Soul.

20. And Adam gave Names to all Cattle, and to the Fowl of the Air, and to every Beast of the Field, but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him .

But though, in giving them names, he considered their several natures and perfections, it was evident to himself, as well as to the Lord, that none of them was an help meet for him.

Marginal references: Heb. call[illegible: 1+ letters]d.

21. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam , and he slept, and he took one of his Ribs , and closed up the Flesh , in stead thereof .

That he, who was without sin, might feel no pain in the taking away of his Rib. And in this sleep some think Adam was in an extasie, wherein he saw what was done together with the reason and mystery of it.

Together with the Flesh upon it, v. 23. Or, one of his sides, for the Hebrew word signifieth a Side as well as a Rib, which may be taken Synecdochically, for a part of one of his sides, viz. a Rib and the Flesh upon it: Or, for one part out of each of his sides; as if two Ribs clothed with▪ Flesh were taken out of the man, because he saith, verse 23, This is Bone of my Bones, not, of my Bone. The Woman was taken out of this part, not out of the higher or lower parts, to shew that she is neither to be her husbands Mistress, to usurp authority over him, 1 Tim. 2. 12. Nor yet to be his slave, to be abused, despised, or trampled under his feet, but to be kindly treated, and used like a companion with moderation, respect, and affection. Qu. How could a Rib be taken from Adam, but it must be either superfluous in Adam, while it was in him, or defective afterwards, both which reflect upon the Creator? Answ. 1. It was no superfluity, but a conveniency, if Adam had at first one Rib extraordinary put into him for this purpose. 2. If Adam lost a Rib upon so glorious an occasion▪ it was but a scar or badge of honour, and no disparagement either to him, or to his Creator. 3. Either God created him a new Rib or hardned the Flesh to the Nature and use of a Rib, and so there was no defect in him.

Together with another Bone or Rib.

(i. e.) Of that Rib and Flesh which he took away from him, which was easie for God to do.

22. And the Rib, which the LORD God had taken from Man, made he a Woman, and brought her unto the Man

From some place at a little distance, whether he first carryed her, that for the decency of the action he might bring her thence.

A Bride to a Bridegroom to be married to him, the great God being pleased to act the part of a Father to give his Daughter and workmanship to him, thereby both teaching Parents their duty of providing Marriages for their Children, and Children their duty of expecting their Parents consent in Marriage.

Marginal references: Heb builded.

23. And Adam said , this is now Bone of my Bones, and Flesh of my Flesh : She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.

Qu. How knew he this? Answ. Either 1. By his own observation: For though it be said that he was asleep till the Rib was taken out and restored, yet he might awake as soon as ever that was done, the reason of his sleep ceasing, and so might see the making of the Woman. Or. 2. By the Revelation of God, who put these words into Adams mouth, to whom therefore these words of Adam are ascribed, Matth. 19. 5.

Or, For this time the Woman is made of my Bones, &c. but for the time to come the Woman as well as the man shall be produced another way, to wit, by Generation.

Made of my Rib and Flesh, i. e. God hath provided me a meet help and Wife, not out of the brute Creatures, but nearer hand, a part of my own Body and of the same nature with my self.

Marginal references: 2 Cor. 11. 8.

24. Therefore shall a man leave his Father and his Mother and shall cleave unto his Wife : And they shall be one Flesh .

These are the words of Moses by divine instinct, or his inference from Adam's words.

In regard of Habitation and society, but not as to natural duty and affection.

In Coni[illegible: 1+ letters]gal relation and highest affection, even above what they owe to their Parents.

Or, they two, as it is in the Samaritan, Syriack, and Arabick translations and Matthew 19. 5.

(i. e.) Shall be esteemed by themselves and others to be as intirely, and inseparably united and shall have as intimate and universal communion, as if they were.

(i. e.) One Person, one Soul, one Body. And this first institution shews the sinfulness of Divorces, and Polygamy, however God might upon a particular reason for a time dispence with his own institution, or to remit the punishment due to the violaters of it.

Marginal references: Matth. 19. 5. Mar. 10. 7. 1 Cor. 6. 16. Eph. 5. 31.

25. And they were both naked, the Man and his Wife; and were not ashamed .

To wit, of their nakedness, as having no guilt, nor cause of shame, no filthy or evil inclinations in their Bodies, no sinful Concupiscence, or impure motions in their Souls, but spotless innocency and perfection which must needs exclude shame.

Gen 2:1-3

The Sabbath of Creation. - “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.” צבא here denotes the totality of the beings that fill the heaven and the earth: in other places (see especially Neh 9:6) it is applied to the host of heaven, i.e., the stars (Deu 4:19; Deu 17:3), and according to a still later representation, to the angels also (1Ki 22:19; Isa 24:21; Neh 9:6; Psa 148:2). These words of Gen 2:1 introduce the completion of the work of creation, and give a greater definiteness to the announcement in Gen 2:2, Gen 2:3, that on the seventh day God ended the work which He had made, by ceasing to create, and blessing the day and sanctifying it. The completion or finishing (כּלּה) of the work of creation on the seventh day (not on the sixth, as the lxx, Sam., and Syr. erroneously render it) can only be understood by regarding the clauses Gen 2:2 and Gen 2:3, which are connected with ויכל by ו  consec. as containing the actual completion, i.e., by supposing the completion to consist, negatively in the cessation of the work of creation, and positively in the blessing and sanctifying of the seventh day. The cessation itself formed part of the completion of the work (for this meaning of שׁבת vid., Gen 8:22; Job 32:1, etc.). As a human artificer completes his work just when he has brought it up to his ideal and ceases to work upon it, so in an infinitely higher sense, God completed the creation of the world with all its inhabitants by ceasing to produce anything new, and entering into the rest of His all-sufficient eternal Being, from which He had come forth, as it were, at and in the creation of a world distinct from His own essence. Hence ceasing to create is called resting (נוּח) in Exo 20:11, and being refreshed (ינּפשׁ) in Exo 31:17. The rest into which God entered after the creation was complete, had its own reality “in the reality of the work of creation, in contrast with which the preservation of the world, when once created, had the appearance of rest, though really a continuous creation” (Ziegler, p. 27). This rest of the Creator was indeed “the consequence of His self-satisfaction in the now united and harmonious, though manifold whole;” but this self-satisfaction of God in His creation, which we call His pleasure in His work, was also a spiritual power, which streamed forth as a blessing upon the creation itself, bringing it into the blessedness of the rest of God and filling it with His peace. This constitutes the positive element in the completion which God gave to the work of creation, by blessing and sanctifying the seventh day, because on it He found rest from the work which He by making (לעשׂות faciendo: cf. Ewald, §280 d) had created. The divine act of blessing was a real communication of powers of salvation, grace, and peace; and sanctifying was not merely declaring holy, but “communicating the attribute of holy,” “placing in a living relation to God, the Holy One, raising to a participation in the pure clear light of the holiness of God.” On קדושׁ see Exo 19:6. The blessing and sanctifying of the seventh day had regard, no doubt, to the Sabbath, which Israel as the people of God was afterwards to keep; but we are not to suppose that the theocratic Sabbath was instituted here, or that the institution of that Sabbath was transferred to the history of the creation. On the contrary, the Sabbath of the Israelites had a deeper meaning, founded in the nature and development of the created world, not for Israel only, but for all mankind, or rather for the whole creation. As the whole earthly creation is subject to the changes of time and the law of temporal motion and development; so all creatures not only stand in need of definite recurring periods of rest, for the sake of recruiting their strength and gaining new power for further development, but they also look forward to a time when all restlessness shall give place to the blessed rest of the perfect consummation. To this rest the resting of God (ἡ κατάπαυσις) points forward; and to this rest, this divine σαββατισός (Heb 4:9), shall the whole world, especially man, the head of the earthly creation, eventually come. For this God ended His work by blessing and sanctifying the day when the whole creation was complete. In connection with Heb. 4, some of the fathers have called attention to the fact, that the account of the seventh day is not summed up, like the others, with the formula “evening was and morning was;” thus, e.g., Augustine writes at the close of his confessions: dies septimus sine vespera est nec habet occasum, quia sanctificasti eum ad permansionem sempiternam. But true as it is that the Sabbath of God has no evening, and that the σαββατισμός, to which the creature is to attain at the end of his course, will be bounded by no evening, but last for ever; we must not, without further ground, introduce this true and profound idea into the seventh creation-day. We could only be warranted in adopting such an interpretation, and understanding by the concluding day of the work of creation a period of endless duration, on the supposition that the six preceding days were so many periods in the world’s history, which embraced the time from the beginning of the creation to the final completion of its development. But as the six creation-days, according to the words of the text, were earthly days of ordinary duration, we must understand the seventh in the same way; and that all the more, because in every passage, in which it is mentioned as the foundation of the theocratic Sabbath, it is regarded as an ordinary day (Exo 20:11; Exo 31:17). We must conclude, therefore, that on the seventh day, on which God rested from His work, the world also, with all its inhabitants, attained to the sacred rest of God; that the κατάπαυσις and σαββατισμός of God were made a rest and sabbatic festival for His creatures, especially for man; and that this day of rest of the new created world, which the forefathers of our race observed in paradise, as long as they continued in a state of innocence and lived in blessed peace with their God and Creator, was the beginning and type of the rest to which the creation, after it had fallen from fellowship with God through the sin of man, received a promise that it should once more be restored through redemption, at its final consummation.

Gen 2:4

The historical account of the world, which commences at the completion of the work of creation, is introduced as the “History of the heavens and the earth,” and treats in three sections, (a) of the original condition of man in paradise (Gen 2:5-25); (b) of the fall (Gen 3); (<); (c) of the division of the human race into two widely different families, so far as concerns their relation to God (Gen 4).

The words, “these are the tholedoth of the heavens and the earth when they were created,” form the heading to what follows. This would never have been disputed, had not preconceived opinions as to the composition of Genesis obscured the vision of commentators. The fact that in every other passage, in which the formula “these (and these) are the tholedoth” occurs (viz., ten times in Genesis; also in Num 3:1; Rth 4:18; 1Ch 1:29), it is used as a heading, and that in this passage the true meaning of תולדות precludes the possibility of its being an appendix to what precedes, fully decides the question. The word תולדות, which is only used in the plural, and never occurs except in the construct state or with suffixes, is a Hiphil noun from הוליד, and signifies literally the generation or posterity of any one, then the development of these generations or of his descendants; in other words, the history of those who are begotten or the account of what happened to them and what they performed. In no instance whatever is it the history of the birth or origin of the person named in the genitive, but always the account of his family and life. According to this use of the word, we cannot understand by the tholedoth of the heavens and the earth the account of the origin of the universe, since according to the biblical view the different things which make up the heavens and the earth can neither be regarded as generations or products of cosmogonic and geogonic evolutions, nor be classed together as the posterity of the heavens and the earth. All the creatures in the heavens and on earth were made by God, and called into being by His word, notwithstanding the fact that He caused some of them to come forth from the earth. Again, as the completion of the heavens and the earth with all their host has already been described in Gen 2:1-3, we cannot understand by “the heavens and the earth,” in Gen 2:4, the primary material of the universe in its elementary condition (in which case the literal meaning of הוליד would be completely relinquished, and the “tholedoth of the heavens and the earth” be regarded as indicating this chaotic beginning as the first stage in a series of productions), but the universe itself after the completion of the creation, at the commencement of the historical development which is subsequently described. This places its resemblance to the other sections, commencing with “these are the generations,” beyond dispute. Just as the tholedoth of Noah, for example, do not mention his birth, but contain his history and the birth of his sons; so the tholedoth of the heavens and the earth do not describe the origin of the universe, but what happened to the heavens and the earth after their creation. בּהבּראם does not preclude this, though we cannot render it “after they were created.” For even if it were grammatically allowable to resolve the participle into a pluperfect, the parallel expressions in Gen 5:1-2, would prevent our doing so. As “the day of their creation” mentioned there, is not a day after the creation of Adam, but the day on which he was created; the same words, when occurring here, must also refer to a time when the heavens and the earth were already created: and just as in Gen 5:1 the creation of the universe forms the starting-point to the account of the development of the human race through the generations of Adam, and is recapitulated for that reason; so here the creation of the universe is mentioned as the starting-point to the account of its historical development, because this account looks back to particular points in the creation itself, and describes them more minutely as the preliminaries to the subsequent course of the world. הבראם is explained by the clause, “in the day that Jehovah God created the earth and the heavens.” Although this clause is closely related to what follows, the simplicity of the account prevents our regarding it as the protasis of a period, the apodosis of which does not follow till Gen 2:5 or even Gen 2:7. The former is grammatically impossible, because in Gen 2:5 the noun stands first, and not the verb, as we should expect in such a case (cf. Gen 3:5). The latter is grammatically tenable indeed, since Gen 2:5, Gen 2:6, might be introduced into the main sentence as conditional clauses; but it is not probable, inasmuch as we should then have a parenthesis of most unnatural length. The clause must therefore be regarded as forming part of the heading. There are two points here that are worthy of notice: first, the unusual combination, “earth and heaven,” which only occurs in Psa 148:13, and shows that the earth is the scene of the history about to commence, which was of such momentous importance to the whole world; and secondly, the introduction of the name Jehovah in connection with Elohim. That the hypothesis, which traces the interchange in the two names in Genesis to different documents, does not suffice to explain the occurrence of Jehovah Elohim in Gen 2:4-3:24, even the supporters of this hypothesis cannot possibly deny. Not only is God called Elohim alone in the middle of this section, viz., in the address to the serpent, a clear proof that the interchange of the names has reference to their different significations; but the use of the double name, which occurs here twenty times though rarely met with elsewhere, is always significant. In the Pentateuch we only find it in Exo 9:30; in the other books of the Old Testament, in 2Sa 7:22, 2Sa 7:25; 1Ch 17:16-17; 2Ch 6:41-42; Psa 84:8, Psa 84:11; and Psa 50:1, where the order is reversed; and in every instance it is used with peculiar emphasis, to give prominence to the fact that Jehovah is truly Elohim, whilst in Psa 50:1 the Psalmist advances from the general name El and Elohim to Jehovah, as the personal name of the God of Israel. In this section the combination Jehovah Elohim is expressive of the fact, that Jehovah is God, or one with Elohim. Hence Elohim is placed after Jehovah. For the constant use of the double name is not intended to teach that Elohim who created the world was Jehovah, but that Jehovah, who visited man in paradise, who punished him for the transgression of His command, but gave him a promise of victory over the tempter, was Elohim, the same God, who created the heavens and the earth.

The two names may be distinguished thus: Elohim, the plural of אלוהּ, which is only used in the loftier style of poetry, is an infinitive noun from אלהּ to fear, and signifies awe, fear, then the object of fear, the highest Being to be feared, like פּחד, which is used interchangeably with it in Gen 31:42, Gen 31:53, and מורא in Psa 76:12 (cf. Isa 8:12-13). The plural is not used for the abstract, in the sense of divinity, but to express the notion of God in the fulness and multiplicity of the divine powers. It is employed both in a numerical, and also in an intensive sense, so that Elohim is applied to the (many) gods of the heathen as well as to the one true God, in whom the highest and absolute fulness of the divine essence is contained. In this intensive sense Elohim depicts the one true God as the infinitely great and exalted One, who created the heavens and the earth, and who preserves and governs every creature. According to its derivation, however, it is object rather than subject, so that in the plural form the concrete unity of the personal God falls back behind the wealth of the divine potencies which His being contains. In this sense, indeed, both in Genesis and the later, poetical, books, Elohim is used without the article, as a proper name for the true God, even in the mouth of the heathen (1Sa 4:7); but in other places, and here and there in Genesis, it occurs as an appellative with the article, by which prominence is given to the absoluteness of personality of God (Gen 5:22; Gen 6:9, etc.).

The name Jehovah, on the other hand, was originally a proper name, and according to the explanation given by God Himself to Moses (Exo 3:14-15), was formed from the imperfect of the verb הוה = היה. God calls Himself אהיח אשׁר אהיה, then more briefly אהיה, and then again, by changing the first person into the third, יהוה. From the derivation of this name from the imperfect, it follows that it was either pronounced יהוה or יהוה, and had come down from the pre-Mosaic age; for the form הוה had been forced out of the spoken language by היה even in Moses’ time. The Masoretic pointing יהוה belongs to a time when the Jews had long been afraid to utter this name at all, and substituted אדני, the vowels of which therefore were placed as Keri, the word to be read, under the Kethib יהוה, unless יהוה stood in apposition to אדני, in which case the word was read אלהים and pointed יהוה (a pure monstrosity.)For a fuller discussion of the meaning and pronunciation of the name Jehovah vid., Hengstenberg, Dissertations on the Pentateuch i. p. 213ff.; Oehler in Herzog’s Cyclopaedia; and Hölemann in his Bibelstudien. The last, in common with Stier and others, decides in favour of the Masoretic pointing יהוה as giving the original pronunciation, chiefly on the ground of Rev 1:4 and Rev 1:5, Rev 1:8; but the theological expansion ὁ ὤν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος cannot be regarded as a philological proof of the formation of יהוה by the fusion of הוה, הוה, יהי into one word.

This custom, which sprang from a misinterpretation of Lev 24:16, appears to have originated shortly after the captivity. Even in the canonical writings of this age the name Jehovah was less and less employed, and in the Apocrypha and the Septuagint version ὁ Κύριος (the Lord) is invariably substituted, a custom in which the New Testament writers follow the lxx (vid., Oehler).

If we seek for the meaning of יהוה, the expression אהיה אשׁר אהיה, in Exo 3:14, is neither to be rendered ἔσομαι ὃς ἔσοαι (Aq., Theodt.), “I shall be that I shall be” (Luther), nor “I shall be that which I will or am to be” (M. Baumgarten). Nor does it mean, “He who will be because He is Himself, the God of the future” (Hoffmann). For in names formed from the third person imperfect, the imperfect is not a future, but an aorist. According to the fundamental signification of the imperfect, names so formed point out a person as distinguished by a frequently or constantly manifested quality, in other words, they express a distinctive characteristic (vid., Ewald, §136; Gen 25:26; Gen 27:36, also Gen 16:11 and Gen 21:6). The Vulgate gives it correctly: ego sum qui sum, “I am who I am.” “The repetition of the verb in the same form, and connected only by the relative, signifies that the being or act of the subject expressed in the verb is determined only by the subject itself” (Hoffmann). The verb היה signifies “to be, to happen, to become;” but as neither happening nor becoming is applicable to God, the unchangeable, since the pantheistic idea of a becoming God is altogether foreign to the Scriptures, we must retain the meaning “to be;” not forgetting, however, that as the Divine Being is not a resting, or, so to speak, a dead being, but is essentially living, displaying itself as living, working upon creation, and moving in the world, the formation of יהוה from the imperfect precludes the idea of abstract existence, and points out the Divine Being as moving, pervading history, and manifesting Himself in the world. So far then as the words אהיה אשר אהיה are condensed into a proper name in יהוה, and God, therefore, “is He who is,” inasmuch as in His being, as historically manifested, He is the self-determining one, the name Jehovah, which we have retained as being naturalized in the ecclesiastical phraseology, though we are quite in ignorance of its correct pronunciation, “includes both the absolute independence of God in His historical movements,” and “the absolute constancy of God, or the fact that in everything, in both words and deeds, He is essentially in harmony with Himself, remaining always consistent” (Oehler). The “I am who am,” therefore, is the absolute I, the absolute personality, moving with unlimited freedom; and in distinction from Elohim (the Being to be feared), He is the personal God in His historical manifestation, in which the fulness of the Divine Being unfolds itself to the world. This movement of the person God in history, however, has reference to the realization of the great purpose of the creation, viz., the salvation of man. Jehovah therefore is the God of the history of salvation. This is not shown in the etymology of the name, but in its historical expansion. It was as Jehovah that God manifested Himself to Abram (Gen 15:7), when He made the covenant with him; and as this name was neither derived from an attribute of God, nor from a divine manifestation, we must trace its origin to a revelation from God, and seek it in the declaration to Abram, “I am Jehovah.” Just as Jehovah here revealed Himself to Abram as the God who led him out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give him the land of Canaan for a possession, and thereby described Himself as the author of all the promises which Abram received at his call, and which were renewed to him and to his descendants, Isaac and Jacob; so did He reveal Himself to Moses (Ex 3) as the God of his fathers, to fulfil His promise to their seed, the people of Israel. Through these revelations Jehovah became a proper name for the God, who was working out the salvation of fallen humanity; and in this sense, not only is it used proleptically at the call of Abram (Gen 12), but transferred to the primeval times, and applied to all the manifestations and acts of God which had for their object the rescue of the human race from its fall, as well as to the special plan inaugurated in the call of Abram. The preparation commenced in paradise. To show this, Moses has introduced the name Jehovah into the history in the present chapter, and has indicated the identity of Jehovah with Elohim, not only by the constant association of the two names, but also by the fact that in the heading (Exo 3:4) he speaks of the creation described in Gen 1 as the work of Jehovah Elohim.

Gen 2:5-6

The account in vv. 5-25 is not a second, complete and independent history of the creation, nor does it contain mere appendices to the account in Gen 1; ; but it describes the commencement of the history of the human race. This commencement includes not only a complete account of the creation of the first human pair, but a description of the place which God prepared for their abode, the latter being of the highest importance in relation to the self-determination of man, with its momentous consequences to both earth and heaven. Even in the history of the creation man takes precedence of all other creatures, as being created in the image of God and appointed lord of all the earth, though he is simply mentioned there as the last and highest link in the creation. To this our present account is attached, describing with greater minuteness the position of man in the creation, and explaining the circumstances which exerted the greatest influence upon his subsequent career. These circumstances were-the formation of man from the dust of the earth and the divine breath of life; the tree of knowledge in paradise; the formation of the woman, and the relation of the woman to the man. Of these three elements, the first forms the substratum to the other two. Hence the more exact account of the creation of Adam is subordinated to, and inserted in, the description of paradise (Gen 2:7). In Gen 2:5 and Gen 2:6, with which the narrative commences, there is an evident allusion to paradise: “And as yet there was (arose, grew) no shrub of the field upon the earth, and no herb of the field sprouted; for Jehovah El had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the ground; and a mist arose from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.” היה in parallelism with צמח means to become, to arise, to proceed. Although the growth of the shrubs and sprouting of the herbs are represented here as dependent upon the rain and the cultivation of the earth by man, we must not understand the words as meaning that there was neither shrub nor herb before the rain and dew, or before the creation of man, and so draw the conclusion that the creation of the plants occurred either after or contemporaneously with the creation of man, in direct contradiction to Gen 1:11-12. The creation of the plants is not alluded to here at all, but simply the planting of the garden in Eden. The growing of the shrubs and sprouting of the herbs is different from the creation or first production of the vegetable kingdom, and relates to the growing and sprouting of the plants and germs which were called into existence by the creation, the natural development of the plants as it had steadily proceeded ever since the creation. This was dependent upon rain and human culture; their creation was not. Moreover, the shrub and herb of the field do not embrace the whole of the vegetable productions of the earth. It is not a fact that the field is used in the second section in the same sense as the earth in the first.” שׂדה is not “the widespread plain of the earth, the broad expanse of land,” but a field of arable land, soil fit for cultivation, which forms only a part of the “earth” or “ground.” Even the “beast of the field” in Gen 2:19 and Gen 3:1 is not synonymous with the “beast of the earth” in Gen 1:24-25, but is a more restricted term, denoting only such animals as live upon the field and are supported by its produce, whereas the “beast of the earth” denotes all wild beasts as distinguished from tame cattle and reptiles. In the same way, the “shrub of the field” consists of such shrubs and tree-like productions of the cultivated land as man raises for the sake of their fruit, and the “herb of the field,” all seed-producing plants, both corn and vegetables, which serve as food for man and beast. - The mist (אד, vapour, which falls as rain, Job 36:27) is correctly regarded by Delitzsch as the creative beginning of the rain (המטיר) itself, from which we may infer, therefore, that it rained before the flood.

Gen 2:7

“Then Jehovah God formed man from dust of the ground.” עפר is the accusative of the material employed (Ewald and Gesenius). The Vav consec. imperf. in Gen 2:7, Gen 2:8, Gen 2:9, does not indicate the order of time, or of thought; so that the meaning is not that God planted the garden in Eden after He had created Adam, nor that He caused the trees to grow after He had planted the garden and placed the man there. The latter is opposed to Gen 2:15; the former is utterly improbable. The process of man’s creation is described minutely here, because it serves to explain his relation to God and to the surrounding world. He was formed from dust (not de limo terrae, from a clod of the earth, for עפר is not a solid mass, but the finest part of the material of the earth), and into his nostril a breath of life was breathed, by which he became an animated being. Hence the nature of man consists of a material substance and an immaterial principle of life. “The breath of life,” i.e., breath producing life, does not denote the spirit by which man is distinguished form the animals, or the soul of man from that of the beasts, but only the life-breath (vid., 1Ki 17:17). It is true, נשׁמה generally signifies the human soul, but in Gen 7:22 חיּים נשׁמת־רוּח is used of men and animals both; and should any one explain this, on the ground that the allusion is chiefly to men, and the animals are connected per zeugma, or should he press the ruach attached, and deduce from this the use of neshamah in relation to men and animals, there are several passages in which neshamah is synonymous with ruach (e.g., Isa 42:5; Job 32:8; Job 33:4), or חיים רוח applied to animals (Gen 6:17; Gen 7:15), or again neshamah used as equivalent to nephesh (e.g., (Jos 10:40, cf. Jos 10:28, Jos 10:30, Jos 10:32). For neshamah, the breathing, πνοή, is “the ruach in action” (Auberlen). Beside this, the man formed from the dust became, through the breathing of the “breath of life,” a חיּה נפשׁ, an animated, and as such a living being; an expression which is also applied to fishes, birds, and land animals (Gen 1:20-21, Gen 1:24, Gen 1:30), and there is no proof of pre-eminence on the part of man. As חיּה נפשׁ, ψυχὴ ζῶσα, does not refer to the soul merely, but to the whole man as an animated being, so נשׁמה does not denote the spirit of man as distinguished from body and soul. On the relation of the soul to the spirit of man nothing can be gathered from this passage; the words, correctly interpreted, neither show that the soul is an emanation, an exhalation of the human spirit, nor that the soul was created before the spirit and merely received its life from the latter. The formation of man from dust and the breathing of the breath of life we must not understand in a mechanical sense, as if God first of all constructed a human figure from dust, and then, by breathing His breath of life into the clod of earth which he had shaped into the form of a man, made it into a living being. The words are to be understood θεοπρεπῶς. By an act of divine omnipotence man arose from the dust; and in the same moment in which the dust, by virtue of creative omnipotence, shaped itself into a human form, it was pervaded by the divine breath of life, and created a living being, so that we cannot say the body was earlier than the soul. The dust of the earth is merely the earthly substratum, which was formed by the breath of life from God into an animated, living, self-existent being. When it is said, “God breathed into his nostril the breath of life,” it is evident that this description merely gives prominence to the peculiar sign of life, viz., breathing; since it is obvious, that what God breathed into man could not be the air which man breathes; for it is not that which breathes, but simply that which is breathed. Consequently, breathing into the nostril can only mean, that “God, through His own breath, produced and combined with the bodily form that principle of life, which was the origin of all human life, and which constantly manifests its existence in the breath inhaled and exhaled through the nose” (Delitzsch, Psychol. p. 62). Breathing, however, is common to both man and beast; so that this cannot be the sensuous analogon of the supersensuous spiritual life, but simply the principle of the physical life of the soul. Nevertheless the vital principle in man is different from that in the animal, and the human soul from the soul of the beast. This difference is indicated by the way in which man received the breath of life from God, and so became a living soul. “The beasts arose at the creative word of God, and no communication of the spirit is mentioned even in Gen 2:19; the origin of their soul was coincident with that of their corporeality, and their life was merely the individualization of the universal life, with which all matter was filled in the beginning by the Spirit of God.

On the other hand, the human spirit is not a mere individualization of the divine breath which breathed upon the material of the world, or of the universal spirit of nature; nor is his body merely a production of the earth when stimulated by the creative word of God. The earth does not bring forth his body, but God Himself puts His hand to the work and forms him; nor does the life already imparted to the world by the Spirit of God individualize itself in him, but God breathes directly into the nostrils of the one man, in the whole fulness of His personality, the breath of life, that in a manner corresponding to the personality of God he may become a living soul” (Delitzsch). This was the foundation of the pre-eminence of man, of his likeness to God and his immortality; for by this he was formed into a personal being, whose immaterial part was not merely soul, but a soul breathed entirely by God, since spirit and soul were created together through the inspiration of God. As the spiritual nature of man is described simply by the act of breathing, which is discernible by the senses, so the name which God gives him (Gen 5:2) is founded upon the earthly side of his being: Adam, from אדמה (adamah), earth, the earthly element, like homo from humus, or from χαμά, χαμαί, χαμᾶθεν, to guard him from self-exaltation, not from the red colour of his body, since this is not a distinctive characteristic of man, but common to him and to many other creatures. The name man (Mensch), on the other hand, from the Sanskrit mânuscha, manuschja, from man to think, manas = mens, expresses the spiritual inwardness of our nature.

Gen 2:8-9

The abode, which God prepared for the first man, was a “garden in Eden,” also called “the garden of Eden” (Gen 2:15; Gen 3:23-24; Joe 2:3), or Eden (Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; Eze 31:9). Eden (עדן, i.e., delight) is the proper name of a particular district, the situation of which is described in Gen 2:10.; but it must not be confounded with the Eden of Assyria (2Ki 19:12, etc.) and Coelesyria (Amo 1:5), which is written with double seghol. The garden (lit., a place hedged round) was to the east, i.e., in the eastern portion, and is generally called Paradise from the Septuagint version, in which the word is rendered παράδεισος. This word, according to Spiegel, was derived from the Zendic pairi - daêza, a hedging round, and passed into the Hebrew in the form פּרדּס (Sol 4:13; Ecc 2:5; Neh 2:8), a park, probably through the commercial relations which Solomon established with distant countries. In the garden itself God caused all kinds of trees to grow out of the earth; and among them were tow, which were called “the tree of life” and “the tree of knowledge of good and evil,” on account of their peculiar significance in relation to man (see Gen 2:16 and Gen 3:22). הדּעת, an infinitive, as Jer 22:16 shows, has the article here because the phrase ורע טוב דעת is regarded as one word, and in Jeremiah from the nature of the predicate.

Gen 2:10-14

“And there was a river going out of Eden, to water the garden; and from thence it divided itself, and became four heads;” i.e., the stream took its rise in Eden, flowed through the garden to water it, and on leaving the garden was divided into four heads or beginnings of rivers, that is, into four arms or separate streams. For this meaning of ראשׁים see Eze 16:25; Lam 2:19. Of the four rivers whose names are given to show the geographical situation of paradise, the last two are unquestionably Tigris and Euphrates. Hiddekel occurs in Dan 10:4 as the Hebrew name for Tigris; in the inscriptions of Darius it is called Tigrâ(or the arrow, according to Strabo, Pliny, and Curtius), from the Zendic tighra, pointed, sharp, from which probably the meaning stormy (rapidus Tigris, Hor. Carm. 4, 14, 46) was derived. It flows before (קדמת), in front of, Assyria, not to the east of Assyria; for the province of Assyria, which must be intended here, was on the eastern side of the Tigris: moreover, neither the meaning, “to the east of,” nor the identity of קדמת and מקדם has been, or can be, established from Gen 4:16; 1Sa 13:5, or Eze 39:11, which are the only other passages in which the word occurs, as Ewald himself acknowledges. P'rath, which was not more minutely described because it was so generally known, is the Euphrates; in old Persian, Ufrâtu, according to Delitzsch, or the good and fertile stream; Ufrâtu, according to Spiegler, or the well-progressing stream. According to the present condition of the soil, the sources of the Euphrates and Tigris are not so closely connected that they could be regarded as the commencements of a common stream which has ceased to exist. The main sources of the Tigris, it is true, are only 2000 paces from the Euphrates, but they are to the north of Diarbekr, in a range of mountains which is skirted on three sides by the upper course of the Euphrates, and separates them from this river. We must also look in the same country, the highlands of Armenia, for the other two rivers, if the description of paradise actually rests upon an ancient tradition, and is to be regarded as something more than a mythical invention of the fancy. The name Phishon sounds like the Phasis of the ancients, with which Reland supposed it to be identical; and Chavilah like Cholchis, the well-known gold country of the ancients. But the Φάσις ὁ Κόλχος (Herod. 4, 37, 45) takes its rise in the Caucasus, and not in Armenia. A more probable conjecture, therefore, points to the Cyrus of the ancients, which rises in Armenia, flows northwards to a point not far from the eastern border of Colchis, and then turns eastward in Iberia, from which it flows in a south-easterly direction to the Caspian Sea. The expression, “which compasseth the whole land of Chavilah,” would apply very well to the course of this river from the eastern border of Colchis; for סבב does not necessarily signify to surround, but to pass through with different turns, or to skirt in a semi-circular form, and Chavilah may have been larger than modern Colchis. It is not a valid objection to this explanation, that in every other place Chavilah is a district of Southern Arabia. The identity of this Chavilah with the Chavilah of the Joktanites (Gen 10:29; Gen 25:18; 1Sa 15:7) or of the Cushites (Gen 10:7; 1Ch 1:9) is disproved not only by the article used here, which distinguishes it from the other, but also by the description of it as land where gold, bdolach, and the shohamstone are found; a description neither requisite nor suitable in the case of the Arabian Chavilah, since there productions are not to be met with there. This characteristic evidently shows that the Chavilah mentioned here was entirely distinct from the other, and a land altogether unknown to the Iraelites.

What we are to understand by הבּדלח is uncertain. There is no certain ground for the meaning “pearls,” given in Saad. and the later Rabbins, and adopted by Bochart and others. The rendering βδέλλα or βδέλλιον, bdellium, a vegetable gum, of which Cioscorus says, οἱ δὲ μάδελκον οἱ δὲ βολχὸν καλχὸν, and Pliny, “alii brochon appellant, alii malacham, alii maldacon,” is favoured by the similarity in the name; but, on the other side, there is the fact that Pliny describes this gum as nigrum and hadrobolon, and Dioscorus as ὑποπέλιον (blackish), which does not agree with Num 11:7, where the appearance of the white grains of the manna is compared to that of bdolach. - The stone shoham, according to most of the early versions, is probably the beryl, which is most likely the stone intended by the lxx (ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος, the leek-green stone), as Pliny, when speaking of beryls, describes those as probatissimi, qui viriditatem puri maris imitantur; but according to others it is the onyx or sardonyx (vid., Ges. s.v.).The two productions furnish no proof that the Phishon is to be sought for in India. The assertion that the name bdolach is Indian, is quite unfounded, for it cannot be proved that madâlaka in Sanscrit is a vegetable gum; nor has this been proved of madâra, which is possibly related to it (cf. Lassen’s indische Althk. 1, 290 note). Moreover, Pliny speaks of Bactriana as the land “in qua Bdellium est nominatissimum,” although he adds, “nascitur et in Arabia Indiaque, et Media ac Babylone;” and Isidorus says of the Bdella which comes from India, “Sordida est et nigra et majori gleba,” which, again, does not agree with Num 11:7. - The Shoham-stone also is not necessarily associated with India; for although Pliny says of the beryls, “India eos gignit, raro alibi repertos,” he also observes, “in nostro orbe aliquando circa Pontum inveniri putantur.”

The Gihon (from גּוּח to break forth) is the Araxes, which rises in the neighbourhood of the Euphrates, flows from west to east, joins the Cyrus, and falls with it into the Caspian Sea. The name corresponds to the Arabic Jaihun, a name given by the Arabians and Persians to several large rivers. The land of Cush cannot, of course, be the later Cush, or Ethiopia, but must be connected with the Asiatic Κοσσαία, which reached to the Caucasus, and to which the Jews (of Shirwan) still give this name. But even though these four streams do not now spring from one source, but on the contrary their sources are separated by mountain ranges, this fact does not prove that the narrative before us is a myth. Along with or since the disappearance of paradise, that part of the earth may have undergone such changes that the precise locality can no longer be determined with certainty.That the continents of our globe have undergone great changes since the creation of the human race, is a truth sustained by the facts of natural history and the earliest national traditions, and admitted by the most celebrated naturalists. (See the collection of proofs made by Keerl.) These changes must not be all attributed to the flood; many may have occurred before and many after, like the catastrophe in which the Dead Sea originated, without being recorded in history as this has been. Still less must we interpret Gen 11:1 (compared with Gen 10:25), as Fabri and Keerl have done, as indicating a complete revolution of the globe, or a geogonic process, by which the continents of the old world were divided, and assumed their present physignomy.

Gen 2:15-17

After the preparation of the garden in Eden God placed the man there, to dress it and to keep it. ינּיחהוּ not merely expresses removal thither, but the fact that the man was placed there to lead a life of repose, not indeed in inactivity, but in fulfilment of the course assigned him, which was very different from the trouble and restlessness of the weary toil into which he was plunged by sin. In paradise he was to dress (colere) the garden; for the earth was meant to be tended and cultivated by man, so that without human culture, plants and even the different varieties of corn degenerate and grow wild. Cultivation therefore preserved (שׁמר to keep) the divine plantation, not merely from injury on the part of any evil power, either penetrating into, or already existing in the creation, but also from running wild through natural degeneracy. As nature was created for man, it was his vocation not only to ennoble it by his work, to make it subservient to himself, but also to raise it into the sphere of the spirit and further its glorification. This applied not merely to the soil beyond the limits of paradise, but to the garden itself, which, although the most perfect portion of the terrestrial creation, was nevertheless susceptible of development, and which was allotted to man, in order that by his care and culture he might make it into a transparent mirror of the glory of the Creator. - Here too the man was to commence his own spiritual development. To this end God had planted two trees in the midst of the garden of Eden; the one to train his spirit through the exercise of obedience to the word of God, the other to transform his earthly nature into the spiritual essence of eternal life. These trees received their names from their relation to man, that is to say, from the effect which the eating of their fruit was destined to produce upon human life and its development. The fruit of the tree of life conferred the power of eternal, immortal life; and the tree of knowledge was planted, to lead men to the knowledge of good and evil. The knowledge of good and evil was no mere experience of good and ill, but a moral element in that spiritual development, through which the man created in the image of God was to attain to the filling out of that nature, which had already been planned in the likeness of God. For not to know what good and evil are, is a sign of either the immaturity of infancy (Deu 1:39), or the imbecility of age (2Sa 19:35); whereas the power to distinguish good and evil is commended as the gift of a king (1Ki 3:9) and the wisdom of angels (2Sa 14:17), and in the highest sense is ascribed to God Himself (Gen 3:5, Gen 3:22). Why then did God prohibit man from eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with the threat that, as soon as he ate thereof, he would surely die? (The inf. abs. before the finite verb intensifies the latter: vid., Ewald, §312a). Are we to regard the tree as poisonous, and suppose that some fatal property resided in the fruit? A supposition which so completely ignores the ethical nature of sin is neither warranted by the antithesis, nor by what is said in Gen 3:22 of the tree of life, nor by the fact that the eating of the forbidden fruit was actually the cause of death. Even in the case of the tree of life, the power is not to be sought in the physical character of the fruit. No earthly fruit possesses the power to give immortality to the life which it helps to sustain. Life is not rooted in man’s corporeal nature; it was in his spiritual nature that it had its origin, and from this it derives its stability and permanence also. It may, indeed, be brought to an end through the destruction of the body; but it cannot be exalted to perpetual duration, i.e., to immortality, through its preservation and sustenance. And this applies quite as much to the original nature of man, as to man after the fall. A body formed from earthly materials could not be essentially immortal: it would of necessity either be turned to earth, and fall into dust again, or be transformed by the spirit into the immortality of the soul. The power which transforms corporeality into immortality is spiritual in its nature, and could only be imparted to the earthly tree or its fruit through the word of God, through a special operation of the Spirit of God, an operation which we can only picture to ourselves as sacramental in its character, rendering earthly elements the receptacles and vehicles of celestial powers. God had given such a sacramental nature and significance to the two trees in the midst of the garden, that their fruit could and would produce supersensual, mental, and spiritual effects upon the nature of the first human pair. The tree of life was to impart the power of transformation into eternal life. The tree of knowledge was to lead man to the knowledge of good and evil; and, according to the divine intention, this was to be attained through his not eating of its fruit. This end was to be accomplished, not only by his discerning in the limit imposed by the prohibition the difference between that which accorded with the will of God and that which opposed it, but also by his coming eventually, through obedience to the prohibition, to recognise the fact that all that is opposed to the will of God is an evil to be avoided, and, through voluntary resistance to such evil, to the full development of the freedom of choice originally imparted to him into the actual freedom of a deliberate and self-conscious choice of good. By obedience to the divine will he would have attained to a godlike knowledge of good and evil, i.e., to one in accordance with his own likeness to God. He would have detected the evil in the approaching tempter; but instead of yielding to it, he would have resisted it, and thus have made good his own property acquired with consciousness and of his own free-will, and in this way by proper self-determination would gradually have advanced to the possession of the truest liberty. But as he failed to keep this divinely appointed way, and ate the forbidden fruit in opposition to the command of God, the power imparted by God to the fruit was manifested in a different way. He learned the difference between good and evil from his own guilty experience, and by receiving the evil into his own soul, fell a victim to the threatened death. Thus through his own fault the tree, which should have helped him to attain true freedom, brought nothing but the sham liberty of sin, and with it death, and that without any demoniacal power of destruction being conjured into the tree itself, or any fatal poison being hidden in its fruit.

Gen 2:18-22

Creation of the Woman. - As the creation of the man is introduced in Gen 1:26-27, with a divine decree, so here that of the woman is preceded by the divine declaration, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him כּנגדּו עזר, a help of his like: “i.e., a helping being, in which, as soon as he sees it, he may recognise himself” (Delitzsch). Of such a help the man stood in need, in order that he might fulfil his calling, not only to perpetuate and multiply his race, but to cultivate and govern the earth. To indicate this, the general word כנגדו עזר is chosen, in which there is an allusion to the relation of the sexes. To call out this want, God brought the larger quadrupeds and birds to the man, “to see what he would call them (לו lit., each one); and whatsoever the man might call every living being should be its name.” The time when this took place must have been the sixth day, on which, according to Gen 1:27, the man and woman were created: and there is no difficulty in this, since it would not have required much time to bring the animals to Adam to see what he would call them, as the animals of paradise are all we have to think of; and the deep sleep into which God caused the man to fall, till he had formed the woman from his rib, need not have continued long. In Gen 1:27 the creation of the woman is linked with that of the man; but here the order of sequence is given, because the creation of the woman formed a chronological incident in the history of the human race, which commences with the creation of Adam. The circumstance that in Gen 2:19 the formation of the beasts and birds is connected with the creation of Adam by the imperf. c. ו consec., constitutes to objection to the plan of creation given in Gen 1. The arrangement may be explained on the supposition, that the writer, who was about to describe the relation of man to the beasts, went back to their creation, in the simple method of the early Semitic historians, and placed this first instead of making it subordinate; so that our modern style of expressing the same thought would be simply this: “God brought to Adam the beasts which He had formed.”A striking example of this style of narrative we find in 1Ki 7:13. First of all, the building and completion of the temple are noticed several times in 1 Kings 6, and the last time in connection with the year and month (1Ki 6:9, 1Ki 6:14, 1Ki 6:37-38); after that, the fact is stated, that the royal palace was thirteen years in building; and then the writer proceeds thus: “And king Solomon sent and fetched Hiram from Tyre...and he came to king Solomon, and did all his work; and made the two pillars,” etc. Now, if we were to understand the historical preterite with consec., here, as giving the order of sequence, Solomon would be made to send for the Tyrian artist, thirteen years after the temple was finished, to come and prepare the pillars for the porch, and all the vessels needed for the temple. But the writer merely expresses in Semitic style the simple thought, that “Hiram, whom Solomon fetched from Tyre, made the vessels,” etc. Another instance we find in Jdg 2:6.

Moreover, the allusion is not to the creation of all the beasts, but simply to that of the beasts living in the field (game and tame cattle), and of the fowls of the air-to beasts, therefore, which had been formed like man from the earth, and thus stood in a closer relation to him than water animals or reptiles. For God brought the animals to Adam, to show him the creatures which were formed to serve him, that He might see what he would call them. Calling or naming presupposes acquaintance. Adam is to become acquainted with the creatures, to learn their relation to him, and by giving them names to prove himself their lord. God does not order him to name them; but by bringing the beasts He gives him an opportunity of developing that intellectual capacity which constitutes his superiority to the animal world. “The man sees the animals, and thinks of what they are and how they look; and these thoughts, in themselves already inward words, take the form involuntarily of audible names, which he utters to the beasts, and by which he places the impersonal creatures in the first spiritual relation to himself, the personal being” (Delitzsch). Language, as W. v. Humboldt says, is “the organ of the inner being, or rather the inner being itself as it gradually attains to inward knowledge and expression.” It is merely thought cast into articulate sounds or words. The thoughts of Adam with regard to the animals, to which he gave expression in the names that he gave them, we are not to regard as the mere results of reflection, or of abstraction from merely outward peculiarities which affected the senses; but as a deep and direct mental insight into the nature of the animals, which penetrated far deeper than such knowledge as is the simple result of reflecting and abstracting thought. The naming of the animals, therefore, led to this result, that there was not found a help meet for man. Before the creation of the woman we must regard the man (Adam) as being “neither male, in the sense of complete sexual distinction, nor androgynous as though both sexes were combined in the one individual created at the first, but as created in anticipation of the future, with a preponderant tendency, a male in simple potentiality, out of which state he passed, the moment the woman stood by his side, when the mere potentia became an actual antithesis” (Ziegler).

Then God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man (Gen 2:21). תּרדּמּה, a deep sleep, in which all consciousness of the outer world and of one’s own existence vanishes. Sleep is an essential element in the nature of man as ordained by God, and is quite as necessary for man as the interchange of day and night for all nature besides. But this deep sleep was different from natural sleep, and God caused it to fall upon the man by day, that He might create the woman out of him. “Everything out of which something new is to spring, sinks first of all into such a sleep” (Ziegler). צלע means the side, and, as a portion of the human body, the rib. The correctness of this meaning, which is given by all the ancient versions, is evident from the words, “God took one of his צלעות,” which show that the man had several of them. “And closed up flesh in the place thereof;” i.e., closed the gap which had been made, with flesh which He put in the place of the rib. The woman was created, not of dust of the earth, but from a rib of Adam, because she was formed for an inseparable unity and fellowship of life with the man, and the mode of her creation was to lay the actual foundation for the moral ordinance of marriage. As the moral idea of the unity of the human race required that man should not be created as a genus or plurality,Natural science can only demonstrate the unity of the human race, not the descent of all men from one pair, though many naturalists question and deny even the former, but without any warrant from anthropological facts. For every thorough investigation leads to the conclusion arrived at by the latest inquirer in this department, Th. Waitz, that not only are there no facts in natural history which preclude the unity of the various races of men, and fewer difficulties in the way of this assumption than in that of the opposite theory of specific diversities; but even in mental respects there are no specific differences within the limits of the race. Delitzsch has given an admirable summary of the proofs of unity. “That the races of men,” he says, “are not species of one genus, but varieties of one species, is confirmed by the agreement in the physiological and pathological phenomena in them all, by the similarity in the anatomical structure, in the fundamental powers and traits of the mind, in the limits to the duration of life, in the normal temperature of the body and the average rate of pulsation, in the duration of pregnancy, and in the unrestricted fruitfulness of marriages between the various races.” so the moral relation of the two persons establishing the unity of the race required that man should be created first, and then the woman from the body of the man. By this the priority and superiority of the man, and the dependence of the woman upon the man, are established as an ordinance of divine creation. This ordinance of God forms the root of that tender love with which the man loves the woman as himself, and by which marriage becomes a type of the fellowship of love and life, which exists between the Lord and His Church (Eph 5:32). If the fact that the woman was formed from a rib, and not from any other part of the man, is significant; all that we can find in this is, that the woman was made to stand as a helpmate by the side of the man, not that there was any allusion to conjugal love as founded in the heart; for the text does not speak of the rib as one which was next the heart. The word בּנה is worthy of note: from the rib of the man God builds the female, through whom the human race is to be built up by the male (Gen 16:2; Gen 30:3).

Gen 2:23-25

The design of God in the creation of the woman is perceived by Adam, as soon as he awakes, when the woman is brought to him by God. Without a revelation from God, he discovers in the woman “bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh.” The words, “this is now (הפּעם lit., this time) bone of my bones,” etc., are expressive of joyous astonishment at the suitable helpmate, whose relation to himself he describes in the words, “she shall be called Woman, for she is taken out of man.” אשּׁה is well rendered by Luther, “Männin” (a female man), like the old Latin vira from vir. The words which follow, “therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall become one flesh,” are not to be regarded as Adam’s, first on account of the על־כּן, which is always used in Genesis, with the exception of Gen 20:6; Gen 42:21, to introduce remarks of the writer, either of an archaeological or of a historical character, and secondly, because, even if Adam on seeing the woman had given prophetic utterance to his perception of the mystery of marriage, he could not with propriety have spoken of father and mother. They are the words of Moses, written to bring out the truth embodied in the fact recorded as a divinely appointed result, to exhibit marriage as the deepest corporeal and spiritual unity of man and woman, and to hold up monogamy before the eyes of the people of Israel as the form of marriage ordained by God. But as the words of Moses, they are the utterance of divine revelation; and Christ could quote them, therefore, as the word of God (Mat 19:5). By the leaving of father and mother, which applies to the woman as well as to the man, the conjugal union is shown to be a spiritual oneness, a vital communion of heart as well as of body, in which it finds its consummation. This union is of a totally different nature from that of parents and children; hence marriage between parents and children is entirely opposed to the ordinance of God. Marriage itself, notwithstanding the fact that it demands the leaving of father and mother, is a holy appointment of God; hence celibacy is not a higher or holier state, and the relation of the sexes for a pure and holy man is a pure and holy relation. This is shown in Gen 2:25 : “They were both naked ערוּמּים, with dagesh in the מ, is an abbreviated form of עירמּים Gen 3:7, from עוּר to strip), the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” Their bodies were sanctified by the spirit, which animated them. Shame entered first with sin, which destroyed the normal relation of the spirit to the body, exciting tendencies and lusts which warred against the soul, and turning the sacred ordinance of God into sensual impulses and the lust of the flesh.

The Creation. (b. c. 4004.)

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

We have here, I. The settlement of the kingdom of nature, in God's resting from the work of creation, v. 1, 2. Here observe, 1. The creatures made both in heaven and earth are the hosts or armies of them, which denotes them to be numerous, but marshalled, disciplined, and under command. How great is the sum of them! And yet every one knows and keeps his place. God uses them as his hosts for the defence of his people and the destruction of his enemies; for he is the Lord of hosts, of all these hosts, Dan. iv. 35. 2. The heavens and the earth are finished pieces, and so are all the creatures in them. So perfect is God's work that nothing can be added to it nor taken from it, Eccl. iii. 14. God that began to build showed himself well able to finish. 3. After the end of the first six days God ceased from all works of creation. He has so ended his work as that though, in his providence, he worketh hitherto (John v. 17), preserving and governing all the creatures, and particularly forming the spirit of man within him, yet he does not make any new species of creatures. In miracles, he has controlled and overruled nature, but never changed its settled course, nor repealed nor added to any of its establishments. 4. The eternal God, though infinitely happy in the enjoyment of himself, yet took a satisfaction in the work of his own hands. He did not rest, as one weary, but as one well-pleased with the instances of his own goodness and the manifestations of his own glory.

II. The commencement of the kingdom of grace, in the sanctification of the sabbath day, v. 3. He rested on that day, and took a complacency in his creatures, and then sanctified it, and appointed us, on that day, to rest and take a complacency in the Creator; and his rest is, in the fourth commandment, made a reason for ours, after six days' labour. Observe, 1. The solemn observance of one day in seven, as a day of holy rest and holy work, to God's honour, is the indispensable duty of all those to whom God has revealed his holy sabbaths. 2. The way of sabbath-sanctification is the good old way, Jer. vi. 16. Sabbaths are as ancient as the world; and I see no reason to doubt that the sabbath, being now instituted in innocency, was religiously observed by the people of God throughout the patriarchal age. 3. The sabbath of the Lord is truly honourable, and we have reason to honour it—honour it for the sake of its antiquity, its great Author, the sanctification of the first sabbath by the holy God himself, and by our first parents in innocency, in obedience to him. 4. The sabbath day is a blessed day, for God blessed it, and that which he blesses is blessed indeed. God has put an honour upon it, has appointed us, on that day, to bless him, and has promised, on that day, to meet us and bless us. 5. The sabbath day is a holy day, for God has sanctified it. He has separated and distinguished it from the rest of the days of the week, and he has consecrated it and set it apart to himself and his own service and honour. Though it is commonly taken for granted that the Christian sabbath we observe, reckoning from the creation, is not the seventh but the first day of the week, yet being a seventh day, and we in it, celebrating the rest of God the Son, and the finishing of the work of our redemption, we may and ought to act faith upon this original institution of the sabbath day, and to commemorate the work of creation, to the honour of the great Creator, who is therefore worthy to receive, on that day, blessing, and honour, and praise, from all religious assemblies.

The Creation. (b. c. 4004.)

4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

In these verses, I. Here is a name given to the Creator which we have not yet met with, and that is Jehovah—the LORD, in capital letters, which are constantly used in our English translation to intimate that in the original it is Jehovah. All along, in the first chapter, he was called Elohim—a God of power; but now Jehovah Elohim—a God of power and perfection, a finishing God. As we find him known by his name Jehovah when he appeared to perform what he had promised (Exod. vi. 3), so now we have him known by that name, when he had perfected what he had begun. Jehovah is that great and incommunicable name of God which denotes his having his being of himself, and his giving being to all things; fitly therefore is he called by that name now that heaven and earth are finished.

II. Further notice taken of the production of plants and herbs, because they were made and appointed to be food for man, v. 5, 6. Here observe, 1. The earth did not bring forth its fruits of itself, by any innate virtue of its own but purely by the almighty power of God, which formed every plant and every herb before it grew in the earth. Thus grace in the soul, that plant of renown, grows not of itself in nature's soil, but is the work of God's own hands. 2. Rain also is the gift of God; it came not till the Lord God caused it to rain. If rain be wanted, it is God that withholds it; if rain come plentifully in its season, it is God that sends it; if it come in a distinguishing way, it is God that causeth it to rain upon one city and not upon another, Amos iv. 7. 3. Though God, ordinarily, works by means, yet he is not tied to them, but when he pleases he can do his own work without them. As the plants were produced before the sun was made, so they were before there was either rain to water the earth or man to till it. Therefore though we must not tempt God in the neglect of means, yet we must trust God in the want of means. 4. Some way or other God will take care to water the plants that are of his own planting. Though as yet there was no rain, God made a mist equivalent to a shower, and with it watered the whole face of the ground. Thus he chose to fulfil his purpose by the weakest means, that the excellency of the power might be of God. Divine grace descends like a mist, or silent dew, and waters the church without noise, Deut. xxxii. 2.

III. A more particular account of the creation of man, v. 7. Man is a little world, consisting of heaven and earth, soul and body. Now here we have an account of the origin of both and the putting of both together: let us seriously consider it, and say, to our Creator's praise, We are fearfully and wonderfully made, Ps. cxxxix. 14. Elihu, in the patriarchal age, refers to this history when he says (Job xxxiii. 6), I also am formed out of the clay, and (v. 4), The breath of the Almighty hath given me life, and (ch. xxxii. 8), There is a spirit in man. Observe then,

1. The mean origin, and yet the curious structure, of the body of man. (1.) The matter was despicable. He was made of the dust of the ground, a very unlikely thing to make a man of; but the same infinite power that made the world of nothing made man, its master-piece, of next to nothing. He was made of the dust, the small dust, such as is upon the surface of the earth. Probably, not dry dust, but dust moistened with the mist that went up, v. 6. He was not made of gold-dust, powder of pearl, or diamond dust, but common dust, dust of the ground. Hence he is said to be of the earth, choikos—dusty, 1 Cor. xv. 47. And we also are of the earth, for we are his offspring, and of the same mould. So near an affinity is there between the earth and our earthly parents that our mother's womb, out of which we were born, is called the earth (Ps. cxxxix. 15), and the earth, in which we must be buried, is called our mother's womb, Job i. 21. Our foundation is in the earth, Job iv. 19. Our fabric is earthly, and the fashioning of it like that of an earthen vessel, Job x. 9. Our food is out of the earth, Job xxviii. 5. Our familiarity is with the earth, Job xvii. 14. Our fathers are in the earth, and our own final tendency is to it; and what have we then to be proud of? (2.) Yet the Maker was great, and the make fine. The Lord God, the great fountain of being and power, formed man. Of the other creatures it is said that they were created and made; but of man that he was formed, which denotes a gradual process in the work with great accuracy and exactness. To express the creation of this new thing, he takes a new word, a word (some think) borrowed from the potter's forming his vessel upon the wheel; for we are the clay, and God the potter, Isa. lxiv. 8. The body of man is curiously wrought, Ps. cxxxix. 15, 16. Materiam superabat opus—The workmanship exceeded the materials. Let us present our bodies to God as living sacrifices (Rom. xii. 1), as living temples (1 Cor. vi. 19), and then these vile bodies shall shortly be new-formed like Christ's glorious body, Phil. iii. 21.

2. The high origin and the admirable serviceableness of the soul of man. (1.) It takes its rise from the breath of heaven, and is produced by it. It was not made of the earth, as the body was; it is a pity then that it should cleave to the earth, and mind earthly things. It came immediately from God; he gave it to be put into the body (Eccl. xii. 7), as afterwards he gave the tables of stone of his own writing to be put into the ark, and the urim of his own framing to be put into the breast-plate. Hence God is not only the former but the Father of spirits. Let the soul which God has breathed into us breathe after him; and let it be for him, since it is from him. Into his hands let us commit our spirits, for from his hands we had them. (2.) It takes its lodging in a house of clay, and is the life and support of it. It is by it that man is a living soul, that is, a living man; for the soul is the man. The body would be a worthless, useless, loathsome carcase, if the soul did not animate it. To God that gave us these souls we must shortly give an account of them, how we have employed them, used them, proportioned them, and disposed of them; and if then it be found that we have lost them, though it were to gain the world, we shall be undone for ever. Since the extraction of the soul is so noble, and its nature and faculties are so excellent, let us not be of those fools that despise their own souls, by preferring their bodies before them, Prov. xv. 32. When our Lord Jesus anointed the blind man's eyes with clay perhaps he intimated that it was he who at first formed man out of the clay; and when he breathed on his disciples, saying, Receive you the Holy Ghost, he intimated that it was he who at first breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life. He that made the soul is alone able to new-make it.

The Garden of Eden. (b. c. 4004.)

8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. 11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12 And the gold of that land is good; there is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. 14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. 15 And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

Man consisting of body and soul, a body made out of the earth and a rational immortal soul the breath of heaven, we have, in these verses, the provision that was made for the happiness of both; he that made him took care to make him happy, if he could but have kept himself so and known when he was well off. That part of man by which he is allied to the world of sense was made happy; for he was put in the paradise of God: that part by which he is allied to the world of spirits was well provided for; for he was taken into covenant with God. Lord, what is man that he should be thus dignified—man that is a worm! Here we have,

I. A description of the garden of Eden, which was intended for the mansion and demesne of this great lord, the palace of this prince. The inspired penman, in this history, writing for the Jews first, and calculating his narratives for the infant state of the church, describes things by their outward sensible appearances, and leaves us, by further discoveries of the divine light, to be led into the understanding of the mysteries couched under them. Spiritual things were strong meat, which they could not yet bear; but he writes to them as unto carnal, 1 Cor. iii. 1. Therefore he does not so much insist upon the happiness of Adam's mind as upon that of his outward state. The Mosaic history, as well as the Mosaic law, has rather the patterns of heavenly things than the heavenly things themselves, Heb. ix. 23. Observe,

1. The place appointed for Adam's residence was a garden; not an ivory house nor a palace overlaid with gold, but a garden, furnished and adorned by nature, not by art. What little reason have men to be proud of stately and magnificent buildings, when it was the happiness of man in innocency that he needed none! As clothes came in with sin, so did houses. The heaven was the roof of Adam's house, and never was any roof so curiously ceiled and painted. The earth was his floor, and never was any floor so richly inlaid. The shadow of the trees was his retirement; under them were his dining-rooms, his lodging-rooms, and never were any rooms so finely hung as these: Solomon's, in all their glory, were not arrayed like them. The better we can accommodate ourselves to plain things, and the less we indulge ourselves with those artificial delights which have been invented to gratify men's pride and luxury, the nearer we approach to a state of innocency. Nature is content with a little and that which is most natural, grace with less, but lust with nothing.

2. The contrivance and furniture of this garden were the immediate work of God's wisdom and power. The Lord God planted this garden, that is, he had planted it—upon the third day, when the fruits of the earth were made. We may well suppose to have been the most accomplished place for pleasure and delight that ever the sun saw, when the all-sufficient God himself designed it to be the present happiness of his beloved creature, man, in innocency, and a type and a figure of the happiness of the chosen remnant in glory. No delights can be agreeable nor satisfying to a soul but those that God himself has provided and appointed for it; no true paradise, but of God's planting. The light of our own fires, and the sparks of our own kindling, will soon leave us in the dark, Isa. l. 11. The whole earth was now a paradise compared with what it is since the fall and since the flood; the finest gardens in the world are a wilderness compared with what the whole face of the ground was before it was cursed for man's sake: yet that was not enough; God planted a garden for Adam. God's chosen ones shall have distinguishing favours shown them.

3. The situation of this garden was extremely sweet. It was in Eden, which signifies delight and pleasure. The place is here particularly pointed out by such marks and bounds as were sufficient, I suppose, when Moses wrote, to specify the place to those who knew that country; but now, it seems, the curious cannot satisfy themselves concerning it. Let it be our care to make sure a place in the heavenly paradise, and then we need not perplex ourselves with a search after the place of the earthly paradise. It is certain that, wherever it was, it had all desirable conveniences, and (which never any house nor garden on earth was) without any inconvenience. Beautiful for situation, the joy and the glory of the whole earth, was this garden: doubtless it was earth in its highest perfection.

4. The trees with which this garden was planted. (1.) It had all the best and choicest trees in common with the rest of the ground. It was beautiful and adorned with every tree that, for its height or breadth, its make or colour, its leaf or flower, was pleasant to the sight and charmed the eye; it was replenished and enriched with every tree that yielded fruit grateful to the taste and useful to the body, and so good for food. God, as a tender Father, consulted not only Adam's profit, but his pleasure; for there is a pleasure consistent with innocency, nay, there is a true and transcendent pleasure in innocency. God delights in the prosperity of his servants, and would have them easy; it is owing to themselves if they be uneasy. When Providence puts us into an Eden of plenty and pleasure, we ought to serve him with joyfulness and gladness of heart, in the abundance of the good things he gives us. But, (2.) It had two extraordinary trees peculiar to itself; on earth there were not their like. [1.] There was the tree of life in the midst of the garden, which was not so much a memorandum to him of the fountain and author of his life, nor perhaps any natural means to preserve or prolong life; but it was chiefly intended to be a sign and seal to Adam, assuring him of the continuance of life and happiness, even to immortality and everlasting bliss, through the grace and favour of his Maker, upon condition of his perseverance in this state of innocency and obedience. Of this he might eat and live. Christ is now to us the tree of life (Rev. ii. 7; xxii. 2), and the bread of life, John vi. 48, 53. [2.] There was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, so called, not because it had any virtue in it to beget or increase useful knowledge (surely then it would not have been forbidden), but, First, Because there was an express positive revelation of the will of God concerning this tree, so that by it he might know moral good and evil. What is good? It is good not to eat of this tree. What is evil? It is evil to eat of this tree. The distinction between all other moral good and evil was written in the heart of man by nature; but this, which resulted from a positive law, was written upon this tree. Secondly, Because, in the event, it proved to give Adam an experimental knowledge of good by the loss of it and of evil by the sense of it. As the covenant of grace has in it, not only Believe and be saved, but also, Believe not and be damned (Mark xvi. 16), so the covenant of innocency had in it, not only "Do this and live," which was sealed and confirmed by the tree of life, but, "Fail and die," which Adam was assured of by this other tree: "Touch it at your peril;" so that, in these two trees, God set before him good and evil, the blessing and the curse, Deut. xxx. 19. These two trees were as two sacraments.

5. The rivers with which this garden was watered, v. 10-14. These four rivers (or one river branched into four streams) contributed much both to the pleasantness and the fruitfulness of this garden. The land of Sodom is said to be well watered every where, as the garden of the Lord, ch. xiii. 10. Observe, That which God plants he will take care to keep watered. The trees of righteousness are set by the rivers, Ps. i. 3. In the heavenly paradise there is a river infinitely surpassing these; for it is a river of the water of life, not coming out of Eden, as this, but proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb (Rev. xxii. 1), a river that makes glad the city of our God, Ps. xlvi. 4. Hiddekel and Euphrates are rivers of Babylon, which we read of elsewhere. By these the captive Jews sat down and wept, when they remembered Sion (Ps. cxxxvii. 1); but methinks they had much more reason to weep (and so have we) at the remembrance of Eden. Adam's paradise was their prison; such wretched work has sin made. Of the land of Havilah it is said (v. 12), The gold of that land is good, and there is bdellium and the onyx-stone: surely this is mentioned that the wealth of which the land of Havilah boasted might be as foil to that which was the glory of the land of Eden. Havilah had gold, and spices, and precious stones; but Eden had that which was infinitely better, the tree of life, and communion with God. So we may say of the Africans and Indians: "They have the gold, but we have the gospel. The gold of their land is good, but the riches of ours are infinitely better."

II. The placing of man in this paradise of delight, v. 15, where observe,

1. How God put him in possession of it: The Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden; so v. 8, 15. Note here, (1.) Man was made out of paradise; for, after God had formed him, he put him into the garden: he was made of common clay, not of paradise-dust. He lived out of Eden before he lived in it, that he might see that all the comforts of his paradise-state were owing to God's free grace. He could not plead a tenant-right to the garden, for he was not born upon the premises, nor had any thing but what he received; all boasting was hereby for ever excluded. (2.) The same God that was the author of his being was the author of his bliss; the same hand that made him a living soul planted the tree of life for him, and settled him by it. He that made us is alone able to make us happy; he that is the former of our bodies and the Father of our spirits, he, and none but he, can effectually provide for the felicity of both. (3.) It adds much to the comfort of any condition if we have plainly seen God going before us and putting us into it. If we have not forced providence, but followed it, and taken the hints of direction it has given us, we may hope to find a paradise where otherwise we could not have expected it. See Ps. xlvii. 4.

2. How God appointed him business and employment. He put him there, not like Leviathan into the waters, to play therein, but to dress the garden and to keep it. Paradise itself was not a place of exemption from work. Note, here, (1.) We were none of us sent into the world to be idle. He that made us these souls and bodies has given us something to work with; and he that gave us this earth for our habitation has made us something to work on. If a high extraction, or a great estate, or a large dominion, or perfect innocency, or a genius for pure contemplation, or a small family, could have given a man a writ of ease, Adam would not have been set to work; but he that gave us being has given us business, to serve him and our generation, and to work out our salvation: if we do not mind our business, we are unworthy of our being and maintenance. (2.) Secular employments will very well consist with a state of innocency and a life of communion with God. The sons and heirs of heaven, while they are here in this world, have something to do about this earth, which must have its share of their time and thoughts; and, if they do it with an eye to God, they are as truly serving him in it as when they are upon their knees. (3.) The husbandman's calling is an ancient and honourable calling; it was needful even in paradise. The garden of Eden, though it needed not to be weeded (for thorns and thistles were not yet a nuisance), yet must be dressed and kept. Nature, even in its primitive state, left room for the improvements of art and industry. It was a calling fit for a state of innocency, making provision for life, not for lust, and giving man an opportunity of admiring the Creator and acknowledging his providence: while his hands were about his trees, his heart might be with his God. (4.) There is a true pleasure in the business which God calls us to, and employs us in. Adam's work was so far from being an allay that it was an addition to the pleasures of paradise; he could not have been happy if he had been idle: it is still a law, He that will not work has no right to eat, 2 Thess. iii. 10; Prov. xxvii. 23.

III. The command which God gave to man in innocency, and the covenant he then took him into. Hitherto we have seen God as man's powerful Creator and his bountiful Benefactor; now he appears as his Ruler and Lawgiver. God put him into the garden of Eden, not to live there as he might list, but to be under government. As we are not allowed to be idle in this world, and to do nothing, so we are not allowed to be wilful, and do what we please. When God had given man a dominion over the creatures, he would let him know that still he himself was under the government of his Creator.

The Tree of Knowledge Prohibited. (b. c. 4004.)

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Observe here, I. God's authority over man, as a creature that had reason and freedom of will. The Lord God commanded the man, who stood now as a public person, the father and representative of all mankind, to receive law, as he had lately received a nature, for himself and all his. God commanded all the creatures, according to their capacity; the settled course of nature is a law, Ps. cxlviii. 6; civ. 9. The brute-creatures have their respective instincts; but man was made capable of performing reasonable service, and therefore received, not only the command of a Creator, but the command of a Prince and Master. Though Adam was a very great man, a very good man, and a very happy man, yet the Lord God commanded him; and the command was no disparagement to his greatness, no reproach to his goodness, nor any diminution at all to his happiness. Let us acknowledge God's right to rule us, and our own obligations to be ruled by him; and never allow any will of our own in contradiction to, or competition with, the holy will of God.

II. The particular act of this authority, in prescribing to him what he should do, and upon what terms he should stand with his Creator. Here is,

1. A confirmation of his present happiness to him, in that grant, Of every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat. This was not only an allowance of liberty to him, in taking the delicious fruits of paradise, as a recompence for his care and pains in dressing and keeping it (1 Cor. ix. 7, 10), but it was, withal, an assurance of life to him, immortal life, upon his obedience. For the tree of life being put in the midst of the garden (v. 9), as the heart and soul of it, doubtless God had an eye to that especially in this grant; and therefore when, upon his revolt, this grant is recalled, no notice is taken of any tree of the garden as prohibited to him, except the tree of life (ch. iii. 22), of which it is there said he might have eaten and lived for ever, that is, never died, nor ever lost his happiness. "Continue holy as thou art, in conformity to thy Creator's will, and thou shalt continue happy as thou art in the enjoyment of thy Creator's favour, either in this paradise or in a better." Thus, upon condition of perfect personal and perpetual obedience, Adam was sure of paradise to himself and his heirs for ever.

2. A trial of his obedience, upon pain of the forfeiture of all his happiness: "But of the other tree which stood very near the tree of life (for they are both said to be in the midst of the garden), and which was called the tree of knowledge, in the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die;" as if he had said, "Know, Adam, that thou art now upon thy good behaviour, thou art put into paradise upon trial; be observant, be obedient, and thou art made for ever; otherwise thou wilt be as miserable as now thou art happy." Here,

(1.) Adam is threatened with death in case of disobedience: Dying thou shalt die, denoting a sure and dreadful sentence, as, in the former part of this covenant, eating thou shalt eat, denotes a free and full grant. Observe [1.] Even Adam, in innocency, was awed with a threatening; fear is one of the handles of the soul, by which it is taken hold of and held. If he then needed this hedge, much more do we now. [2.] The penalty threatened is death: Thou shalt die, that is, "Thou shalt be debarred from the tree of life, and all the good that is signified by it, all the happiness thou hast, either in possession or prospect; and thou shalt become liable to death, and all the miseries that preface it and attend it." [3.] This was threatened as the immediate consequence of sin: In the day thou eatest, thou shalt die, that is, "Thou shalt become mortal and capable of dying; the grant of immortality shall be recalled, and that defence shall depart from thee. Thou shalt become obnoxious to death, like a condemned malefactor that is dead in the law" (only, because Adam was to be the root of mankind, he was reprieved); "nay, the harbingers and forerunners of death shall immediately seize thee, and thy life, thenceforward, shall be a dying life: and this, surely; it is a settled rule, the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

(2.) Adam is tried with a positive law, not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Now it was very proper to make trial of his obedience by such a command as this, [1.] Because the reason of it is fetched purely from the will of the Law-maker. Adam had in his nature an aversion to that which was evil in itself, and therefore he is tried in a thing which was evil only because it was forbidden; and, being in a small thing, it was the more fit to prove his obedience by. [2.] Because the restraint of it is laid upon the desires of the flesh and of the mind, which, in the corrupt nature of man, are the two great fountains of sin. This prohibition checked both his appetite towards sensitive delights and his ambitions of curious knowledge, that his body might be ruled by his soul and his soul by his God.

Thus easy, thus happy, was man in a state of innocency, having all that heart could wish to make him so. How good was God to him! How many favours did he load him with! How easy were the laws he gave him! How kind the covenant he made with him! Yet man, being in honour, understood not his own interest, but soon became as the beasts that perish.

Adam's Dominion. (b. c. 4004.)

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Here we have, I. An instance of the Creator's care of man and his fatherly concern for his comfort, v. 18. Though God had let him know that he was a subject, by giving him a command, (v. 16, 17), yet here he lets him know also, for his encouragement in his obedience, that he was a friend, and a favourite, and one whose satisfaction he was tender of. Observe,

1. How God graciously pitied his solitude: It is not good that man, this man, should be alone. Though there was an upper world of angels and a lower world of brutes, and he between them, yet there being none of the same nature and rank of beings with himself, none that he could converse familiarly with, he might be truly said to be alone. Now he that made him knew both him and what was good for him, better than he did himself, and he said, "It is not good that he should continue thus alone." (1.) It is not for his comfort; for man is a sociable creature. It is a pleasure to him to exchange knowledge and affection with those of his own kind, to inform and to be informed, to love and to be beloved. What God here says of the first man Solomon says of all men (Eccl. iv. 9, &c.), that two are better than one, and woe to him that is alone. If there were but one man in the world, what a melancholy man must he needs be! Perfect solitude would turn a paradise into a desert, and a palace into a dungeon. Those therefore are foolish who are selfish and would be placed alone in the earth. (2.) It is not for the increase and continuance of his kind. God could have made a world of men at first, to replenish the earth, as he replenished heaven with a world of angels: but the place would have been too strait for the designed number of men to live together at once; therefore God saw fit to make up that number by a succession of generations, which, as God had formed man, must be from two, and those male and female; one will be ever one.

2. How God graciously resolved to provide society for him. The result of this reasoning concerning him was this kind resolution, I will make a help-meet for him; a help like him (so some read it), one of the same nature and the same rank of beings; a help near him (so others), one to cohabit with him, and to be always at hand; a help before him (so others), one that he should look upon with pleasure and delight. Note hence, (1.) In our best state in this world we have need of one another's help; for we are members one of another, and the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee, 1 Cor. xii. 21. We must therefore be glad to receive help from others, and give help to others, as there is occasion. (2.) It is God only who perfectly knows our wants, and is perfectly able to supply them all, Phil. iv. 19. In him alone our help is, and from him are all our helpers. (3.) A suitable wife is a help-meet, and is from the Lord. The relation is then likely to be comfortable when meetness directs and determines the choice, and mutual helpfulness is the constant care and endeavour, 1 Cor. vii. 33, 34. (4.) Family-society, if it is agreeable, is a redress sufficient for the grievance of solitude. He that has a good God, a good heart, and a good wife, to converse with, and yet complains he wants conversation, would not have been easy and content in paradise; for Adam himself had no more: yet, even before Eve was created, we do not find that he complained of being alone, knowing that he was not alone, for the Father was with him. Those that are most satisfied in God and his favour are in the best way, and in the best frame, to receive the good things of this life, and shall be sure of them, as far as Infinite Wisdom sees good.

II. An instance of the creatures' subjection to man, and his dominion over them (v. 19, 20): Every beast of the field and every fowl of the air God brought to Adam, either by the ministry of angels, or by a special instinct, directing them to come to man as their master, teaching the ox betimes to know his owner. Thus God gave man livery and seisin of the fair estate he had granted him, and put him in possession of his dominion over the creatures. God brought them to him, that he might name them, and so might give, 1. A proof of his knowledge, as a creature endued with the faculties both of reason and speech, and so taught more than the beasts of the earth and made wiser than the fowls of heaven, Job xxxv. 11. And, 2. A proof of his power. It is an act of authority to impose names (Dan. i. 7), and of subjection to receive them. The inferior creatures did now, as it were, do homage to their prince at his inauguration, and swear fealty and allegiance to him. If Adam had continued faithful to his God, we may suppose the creatures themselves would so well have known and remembered the names Adam now gave them as to have come at his call, at any time, and answered to their names. God gave names to the day and night, to the firmament, to the earth, and to the sea; and he calleth the stars by their names, to show that he is the supreme Lord of these. But he gave Adam leave to name the beasts and fowls, as their subordinate lord; for, having made him in his own image, he thus put some of his honour upon him.

III. An instance of the creatures' insufficiency to be a happiness for man: But (among them all) for Adam there was not found a help meet for him. Some make these to be the words of Adam himself; observing all the creatures come to him by couples to be named, he thus intimates his desire to his Maker:—"Lord, these have all helps meet for them; but what shall I do? Here is never a one for me." It is rather God's judgment upon the review. He brought them all together, to see if there were ever a suitable match for Adam in any of the numerous families of the inferior creatures; but there was none. Observe here, 1. The dignity and excellency of the human nature. On earth there was not its like, nor its peer to be found among all visible creatures; they were all looked over, but it could not be matched among them all. 2. The vanity of this world and the things of it; put them all together, and they will not make a help-meet for man. They will not suit the nature of his soul, nor supply its needs, nor satisfy its just desires, nor run parallel with its never failing duration. God creates a new thing to be a help-meet for man—not so much the woman as the seed of the woman.

The Formation of Eve; Marriage Instituted. (b. c. 4004.)

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. 25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Here we have, I. The making of the woman, to be a help-meet for Adam. This was done upon the sixth day, as was also the placing of Adam in paradise, though it is here mentioned after an account of the seventh day's rest; but what was said in general (ch. i. 27), that God made man male and female, is more distinctly related here. Observe, 1. That Adam was first formed, then Eve (1 Tim. ii. 13), and she was made of the man, and for the man (1 Cor. xi. 8, 9), all which are urged there as reasons for the humility, modesty, silence, and submissiveness, of that sex in general, and particularly the subjection and reverence which wives owe to their own husbands. Yet man being made last of the creatures, as the best and most excellent of all, Eve's being made after Adam, and out of him, puts an honour upon that sex, as the glory of the man, 1 Cor. xi. 7. If man is the head, she is the crown, a crown to her husband, the crown of the visible creation. The man was dust refined, but the woman was dust double-refined, one remove further from the earth. 2. That Adam slept while his wife was in making, that no room might be left to imagine that he had herein directed the Spirit of the Lord, or been his counsellor, Isa. xl. 13. He had been made sensible of his want of a meet help; but, God having undertaken to provide him one, he does not afflict himself with any care about it, but lies down and sleeps sweetly, as one that had cast all his care on God, with a cheerful resignation of himself and all his affairs to his Maker's will and wisdom. Jehovah-jireh, let the Lord provide when and whom he pleases. If we graciously rest in God, God will graciously work for us and work all for good. 3. That God caused a sleep to fall on Adam, and made it a deep sleep, that so the opening of his side might be no grievance to him; while he knows no sin, God will take care he shall feel no pain. When God, by his providence, does that to his people which is grievous to flesh and blood, he not only consults their happiness in the issue, but by his grace he can so quiet and compose their spirits as to make them easy under the sharpest operations. 4. That the woman was made of a rib out of the side of Adam; not made out of his head to rule over him, nor out of his feet to be trampled upon by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be beloved. Adam lost a rib, and without any diminution to his strength or comeliness (for, doubtless, the flesh was closed without a scar); but in lieu thereof he had a help meet for him, which abundantly made up his loss: what God takes away from his people he will, one way or other, restore with advantage. In this (as in many other things) Adam was a figure of him that was to come; for out of the side of Christ, the second Adam, his spouse the church was formed, when he slept the sleep, the deep sleep, of death upon the cross, in order to which his side was opened, and there came out blood and water, blood to purchase his church and water to purify it to himself. See Eph. v. 25, 26.

II. The marriage of the woman to Adam. Marriage is honourable, but this surely was the most honourable marriage that ever was, in which God himself had all along an immediate hand. Marriages (they say) are made in heaven: we are sure this was, for the man, the woman, the match, were all God's own work; he, by his power, made them both, and now, by his ordinance, made them one. This was a marriage made in perfect innocency, and so was never any marriage since, 1. God, as her Father, brought the woman to the man, as his second self, and a help-meet for him. When he had made her, he did not leave her to her own disposal; no, she was his child, and she must not marry without his consent. Those are likely to settle to their comfort who by faith and prayer, and a humble dependence upon providence, put themselves under a divine conduct. That wife that is of God's making by special grace, and of God's bringing by special providence, is likely to prove a help-meet for a man. 2. From God, as his Father, Adam received her (v. 23): "This is now bone of my bone. Now I have what I wanted, and which all the creatures could not furnish me with, a help meet for me." God's gifts to us are to be received with a humble thankful acknowledgment of his wisdom in suiting them to us, and his favour in bestowing them on us. Probably it was revealed to Adam in a vision, when he was asleep, that this lovely creature, now presented to him, was a piece of himself, and was to be his companion and the wife of his covenant. Hence some have fetched an argument to prove that glorified saints in the heavenly paradise shall know one another. Further, in token of his acceptance of her, he gave her a name, not peculiar to her, but common to her sex: She shall be called woman, Isha, a she-man, differing from man in sex only, not in nature—made of man, and joined to man.

III. The institution of the ordinance of marriage, and the settling of the law of it, v. 24. The sabbath and marriage were two ordinances instituted in innocency, the former for the preservation of the church, the latter for the preservation of the world of mankind. It appears (by Matt. xix. 4, 5) that it was God himself who said here, "A man must leave all his relations, to cleave to his wife;" but whether he spoke it by Moses, the penman, or by Adam (who spoke, v. 23), is uncertain. It should seem, they are the words of Adam, in God's name, laying down this law to all his posterity. 1. See here how great the virtue of a divine ordinance is; the bonds of it are stronger even than those of nature. To whom can we be more firmly bound than the fathers that begat us and the mothers that bore us? Yet the son must quit them, to be joined to his wife, and the daughter forget them, to cleave to her husband, Ps. xlv. 10, 11. 2. See how necessary it is that children should take their parents' consent along with them in their marriage, and how unjust those are to their parents, as well as undutiful, who marry without it; for they rob them of their right to them, and interest in them, and alienate it to another, fraudulently and unnaturally. 3. See what need there is both of prudence and prayer in the choice of this relation, which is so near and so lasting. That had need be well done which is to be done for life. 4. See how firm the bond of marriage is, not to be divided and weakened by having many wives (Mal. ii. 15) nor to be broken or cut off by divorce, for any cause but fornication, or voluntary desertion. 5. See how dear the affection ought to be between husband and wife, such as there is to our own bodies, Eph. v. 28. These two are one flesh; let them then be one soul.

IV. An evidence of the purity and innocency of that state wherein our first parents were created, v. 25. They were both naked. They needed no clothes for defense against cold nor heat, for neither could be injurious to them. They needed none for ornament. Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Nay, they needed none for decency; they were naked, and had no reason to be ashamed. They knew not what shame was, so the Chaldee reads it. Blushing is now the colour of virtue, but it was not then the colour of innocency. Those that had no sin in their conscience might well have no shame in their faces, though they had no clothes to their backs.

CHAPT. II.

ANd the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And in the seventh day, God had finished his worke, which he had made: and he rested in the seventh day, from all his worke which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because in it hee had rested, from all his worke, which God had created and made.

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth, when they were created: in the day that Iehovah God made the earth and the heavens. And every plant of the field, before it was in the earth; and every herbe of the field, before it grew-up: for Iehovah God had not caused-it-to-raine upon the earth; and there was not a man, to till the ground. And a myst went-up from the earth; and watred the whole face of the earth. And Iehovah God formed man, dust of the earth; and inspired his nostrills, with the breath of life: and man was a living soule. And Iehovah God planted a garden in Eden, eastward: and there hee put the man whom he had formed. And Iehovah God made to grow-up out of the ground, every tree desirable for sight, and good for meat: and the tree of life, in the midst of the garden; & the tree of the knowledge of good and evill. And a river, went-out of Eden, to water the garden: and from thence it was parted, and was to foure heads. The name of the one, Pison: the same is it that compasseth, the whole land of Havilah; where there is gold. And the gold of that land, is good: there is Bdelium, and the Beryll stone. And the name of the second river, [illegible: 1 letter]i[illegible: 1 letter]on: the same is it that compasseth, the whole land of Cush. And the name of the third river, Hiddekel: the same is it that goeth, to the east of Assyria: and the fourth river, is Euphrates. And Iehovah God, tooke the man: and put him in the garden of Eden; to till it, and to keepe it. And Iehovah God, commanded the man, saying: of every tree of the garden, eating thou maist eat. But of the tree, of the knowledge of good and evill, thou maist not eat of it: for, in the day thou eatest of it, dying thou shalt dye. And Iehovah God said, It is not good the man should bee, himselfe alone: I will make for him an helpe, as before him. And Iehovah God had, formed out of the ground, every beast of the field, and every fowle of the heavens; and brought them unto Adam, to see what hee would call them: and whatsoever Adam called each living soule, that was the name thereof. And Adam called names, to all cattell, and to the fowle of the heavens, and to every beast of the field: but for Adam, hee found not an helpe, as before him. And Iehovah God, caused a deepe sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he tooke one of his ribs, and closed-up the flesh in the stead therof. And Iehovah God, builded the rib, which he had taken from Adam, to a woman: and hee brought her, unto Adam. And Adam said; This now, is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall bee called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother: and he shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be one flesh. And they were both of them naked, Adam and his wife: and they were not ashamed-of-themselves.

Annotations. FInished:] or, al-done, perfected. host:] or, army; called in Hebrew Saba, which meaneth, an army standing in order, or battle ray. The Greeke here translateth it, garnishing, or furniture. Hereby is meant all creatures in the earth and heavens, which stand as an army, servants to the Lord, Psal. 119. 91. and by him commanded, Esay 45. 12. The Angels are of this army, 1 King. 22. 19. and are called the multitude of the heavenly host, Luke 2. 13. 15. and they were (by likelihood) created with the heavens, in the first day, because those morning starres and sonnes of God, did sing and shout, when God laid and fastned the foundations of the earth, Iob 38. 4. 6. 7. The stars, and furniture of the visible heavens, are also Gods host, Esay 34. 4. Deut. 4. 19. and the starres in their courses, fought against Sisera, Judg. 5. 20. The Israelites comming out of Aegypt, are called the Lords hosts, Exodus 12. 41. Hereupon he is often named the Lord of hosts, or of Sabaoth: and the Apostles in Greek sometime keep the Hebrew name, Lord of Sabaoth, Rom. 9. 29. Iam. 5. 4. sometime they translate it, Lord God Almighty, Revel. 4. 8. from Esa. 6. 3. Vers. 2. seventh day:] The Hebrew shebang, (from which the German word, sieben, and English seven, are derived,) hath the signification of fulnesse; and is a perfect and complete number, after which we begin again with the first day of the weeke. Therefore seven, is used for many or a full number, Gen. 33. 3. Lev. 4. 6. 1 Sam. 2. 5. Ier. 15. 9. Prov. 26. 25. And many mysteries are throughout the Scripture, set forth by the number of seven, as in the feasts and sacrifices of Israel, Deut. 16. 3. 8. 9. 15. Num. 28. 19. and 29. 12. 32. especially in the booke of the Revelation. See also Gen. 21. 31. The Greeke interpreters, translated the sixt day, for the seventh, left the heathens should thinke, (mistaking the phrase,) that God wrought upon the Sabbath. rested:] or, sabbathised, that is, kept sabbath: for of this Hebrew shebath, it is called the Sabbath (or Rest) day. God rested (or ceased) from making moe creatures, Exod. 20. 11. Heb. 4. 3. though as touching the preserving, ordering, governing of the world, the Father worketh hitherto, and Christ worketh, Ioh. 5. 17. Gods Sabbath, was also his rejoycing in his workes, Psal. 104. 31. and this the Chaldee paraphrast observed here; saying, and God delighted the seventh day in his worke which hee had made, and rested. This resting, is spoken of God, after the manner of men; and implieth not any wearinesse in him; for the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary, Esa. 40. 28. worke:] generally put for workes; as the Apostle expounds it, in Heb. 4. 4. Vers. 3. And God blessed:] in Exod. 20. 11. it is sayd, Therefore God blessed, that is, because he him-selfe rested in the seventh day, therefore he blessed and sanctified it unto man; whereupon the Apostle reasoneth, hee that is entred into his rest, hee also hath ceased from his owne workes, as God did from his; Heb. 4. 10. and he blessed the seventh day by giving it this singular priviledge, to bee a day of rest and holinesse, of delight and of feasting vnto the world; Exod. 20. 10. 11. Nehem. 9. 14. Esai. 58. 13. Levit. 23. 2. 3. Wherefore this day is not described by evening and morning, as were the other sixe, which consisted of light and darknesse: but this is all day (or light;) figuring out our perpetuall joyes; Esa. 60. 20. Zach. 14. 6. 7. Revel. 21. 25. And so the Hebrew Doctors understand it of the world to come: for in Breshith rabbah they say; The blessing of the Lord it maketh rich, (Prov. 10. 22.) this is the Sabbath day, as it is written, And God blessed the seventh day, (Gen. 2. 3.) he calleth the Sabbath, the Blessing of the Lord, because it is receiued from the Blessing that is on high: therefore hee sayth, it maketh rich, because it is the abundant wealth of the world, &c, And if we expound the seventh day, of the seventh thousand of yeares, which is the world to come, the exposition is, and he blessed, because in the seventh thousand, all soules shall be bound in the bundell of life; for there shall be there, the augmentation of the Holy Ghost, wherein we shall delight our selves: and so our Rabbines of blessed memory, have sayd in their Commentarie; God blessed the seventh day, the holy God blessed the world to come, which beginneth in the seventh thousand (of yeares.) Compare the last note on Gen. 1. 31. sanctified:] or, hallowed: that is, separated it from common use and worke, unto his owne service alone: that it might be a signe unto men that they should enter into his Rest (or Sabbatisme) Heb. 4. 9. and that the Lord their God doth sanctifie them, Ezek. 20. 12. and thus the Sabbath was made for man, Mar. 2. 27. and made] Heb. to make: that is, to exist & be, and that perfectly and gloriously, as by divine power of creation. Or rather created and made, perfectly and excellently: for so the Hebrew phrase may be explained, as in 1 Chro. 13. 9. Vzza put forth his hand to hold the Arke, for which in 1 Sam. 6. 6. is sayd, and held it: So in Exod. 17. 10. Making also is often used for perfecting, polishing, magnifying, Exod. 36. 2. Ezek. 41. 18. 19. 1 Sam. 12. 6. Psalme 118. 24. The Greeke translateth, which GOD had begun to make. V. 4. the generations:] the Greeke turneth it, the booke (or storie) of the generation, that is, of the procreation or making of the world, and of the accidents that fell out in time after. So other scriptures speake of the begetting and gendering of the dew and frost, Iob 38. 28. 29. of the bearing and bringing forth of the earth, Psal. 90. 2. and of that which a day may bring forth, Prov. 27. 1. the day:] that is, the time: so day is used for the time wherein any thing is done; as the day of salvation, 2 Cor. 6. 2. this thy day, Luk. 19. 42. and sundry the like. Iehovah:] This is Gods proper name, Exod. 15. 3. the force whereof is opened in Rev. 1. 4. 8. & 11. 17. & 16. 5. by He that is, that was, and that will be, (or, is to come.) It commeth of Havah, he was: and by the first letter I, it signifieth, he will be, and by the second Ho, it signifieth hee is. This the Hebrew Doctors acknowledge, for R. Bechai, (on Exodus, fol. 65) saith, that these three times, past, present, and to come, are comprehended in this proper name [Iehovah,] as is knowne unto all. It implieth also, that God hath his being or existence, of him-selfe, before the world was, Esa. 44. 6. that he giveth being unto all things: for in him, they both are and consist, Act. 17. 25. that he giueth being to his word, effecting whatsoever he speaketh, Exod. 6. 3. Esa. 45. 2. 3. Ezek. 5. 17. And thus it differeth from Adonai Lord, which is Gods name, of his sustentation and dominion: whereas Iehovah is his name of existing or being, to which agreeth that name Ehjeh, I am, (or Will be) Exod. 3. 14. and Iehovih, Gen. 15. 2. and Iah, Exod. 15. 2. Howbeit the Greeke version, turneth Iehovah Lord, as well as Adonai: and the New Testament often followeth the same: as, the Lord sayd to my lord, Math. 22. 44. for that which is in Hebrew, Iehovah sayd to my lord, Psal. 110. 1. and many the like, Which is to be observed in the Apostles writings, for the understanding of sundry speeches: as Ro. 10. 9. if thou shalt confesse that Iesus is the Lord: that is, Iehovah (as he is named in Ier. 23. 6.) So in 1 Cor. 12. 3 no man can say that Iesus is the Lord, (that is, Iehovah) but by the holy Ghost. Many times they use God, in stead of this name Iehovah, as 2 Sam. 7. 3. Iehovah is with thee: for which in 1 Chron. 17. 2. is written, God is with thee: 2 King. 11. 10. the house of Iehovah: for which, in 2 Chron. 23. 9. is, the house of God. So, the mouth of Iehovah, Deut. 8. 3. is interpreted, the mouth of God, Math. 4 4. and beleefe in Iehovah, Gen. 15. 6. is beleefe in God, Rom. 4. 3. Iam. 2. 23. Iehovah hath given me, Esa, 8. 18. is, God hath given me, Heb. 2. 13. And this is the name not onely of God the Father, but also of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, as in Ioh. 12. 40. 41. Acts 28. 25. 26. compared with Esai. 6. The Iewes at this day, hold it unlawfull to be pronounced so as it is written: but read Adonai Lord, for it. But in the sanctuarie they grant it was pronounced, when the Priest blessed the people, according to the law in Num. 6. 23.—27. Talmud in Sotah, ch. 7. fol. 37. Verse 5. plant:] or tree, as the Chaldee interprets it. A generall word, therefore the Greeke translateth it greene thing. before it was] or, which was not yet: neyther should have beene, had not God made them by his word: who still causeth such things to grow, Psal. 104. 14. caused it to rayne:] which rayne, is the ordinary meanes to make the earth fruitfull: Iob 38. 26. 27. Heb. 6. 7. And this is spoken of God, because none but hee, can give rayne, Ier. 14. 22. Verse 6. And a mist:] or, vapour: the Chaldee calleth it a cloud: the Greeke, a fountaine. As being the originall matter of the rayne: for by vapours ascending from the earth and sea, rayne is ingendred, and powred out on the earth, Psalme 135. 7. Amos 5. 8. 1 King. 18. 44. V. 7. formed man] or, the earthly man, Adam. Hereupon it is sayd: we are the clay, and thou (Lord) our former, (or potter:) Esa. 64. 8. dust:] or, mould: that is, of the dust, as Eccles. 3. 20. but the speech is forcible, noting mans base originall, whereof he was after put in minde, Gen. 3. 19. and we all, Eccles. 12. 7. Hereupon Paul sayth, the first man was of the earth, dustie, 1 Cor. 15. 47. and wee are sayd to dwell in houses of clay, and to have our foundation in the dust, Iob 4. 19. inspired:] or, blew. This sheweth mans spirit not to be of the earth as his bodie; but of nothing, by the insufflation of God: and so differing from the spirit of beasts, as Solomon observeth, Eccles. 3. 21. This word is used also, when Christ (for to make men new creatures by the preaching of the Gospell,) inspired his Apostles, with the holy Ghost, Ioh. 20. 22. The Rabbines say: The forme of the soule (of man) is not compounded of the elements, &c. but is of the Lord from heaven. Therefore when the materiall body, which is compounded of the elements, is separated, and the breath perisheth because it is not found but with the body, and is needfull for the body in all the actions thereof; this (essentiall) forme is not destroyed, &c. but continueth for ever, even for ever and ever. This is that which Solomon by his wisedome sayd, (in Eccles. 12. 7.) and dust shall returne unto the earth as it was, and the spirit shall returne unto God, who gave it. Maimony in Misn. in Iesudei hatorah, ch. 4. s. 9. breath of life:] or, spirit of lives: whereby is intimated one spirit or soule to be in man, which hath sundry faculties and operations. The breath here is in Hebrew, Neshamah, which hath affinitie with Shamajim heavens: usually it signifieth eyther the breath of God or of men, not of other things: and so it is put for mans minde, or reasonable soule: and the Latine word Mens, minde, is of the same consonant letters that the Hebrew, and of it derived. And this Minde is the Lords candle, searching all the toward roomes of the belly, Prov. 20. 27. The Hebrew lives, is by the holy Ghost translated in Greeke, life, Act. 2. 28. from Psal. 16. 11. and it is so [illegible: 1 word] in the forme plurall, because in life, there are ma[illegible: 1 span] operations, changes, occurrences, &c. that doe fall out. and men:] or Adam: which Paul openeth thus, the first man Adam: 1 Cor. 15. 45 was,] or, was to, that is, become a living soule. The word to, as it is often expressed, so is it sometime omitted in the Hebrew text[illegible: 1 letter] as [illegible: 1 word] Chron. 18. 21. I will be to (or for) a lying spirit: which in 1 King. 22. 22. is written, I will be a lying spirit: unto this living soule, Paul opposeth the second Adam, Christ, who is a livemaking spirit, 1 Cor. 15. 45. where he compareth living or quicke, with livemaking, or quickning; & soule, with spirit: as also the souly (or naturall) body, with the spirituall, verse 44. 46. So by living soule, here is meant, the naturall estate of life in this world, where men doe eat and drinke, procreate children, &c. which in the world to come, shall be otherwise, when this animalitie, or souly state, shall be changed into spiritualtie. As for the terme of this our souly, or naturall life, it dureth while our breath is in us, and the spirit of God in our nostrills, Iob 27. 3. for the breath of the Almighty, giveth us life, Iob 33. 4. And here, for a living soule, the Chaldee translateth speaking, that is, reasonable, because man hath a soule reasonable, wherby he speaketh: so differing from dumbe beasts, Psal. 32. 9. 2 Pet. 2. 16. The Hebrew Doctors say, the forme of the inferiour Adam, mystically signified the forme of the superiour Adam: R. Menachem on Gen. 5. 1. The mystery is opened by the Apostle thus, The first man, is of the earth, earthly: the second man, is of the Lord from heaven: 1 Cor. 15. 47. V. 8. a garden:] called hereupon, the garden of Iehovah, Gen. 13. 10. the Greeke translateth it a paradise, which name is borrowed from the Hebrew, pardese, that signifieth an orchard, Song. 4. 13. Eccles. 2. 5. This place for the pleasantnesse of it, is made a figure of heaven, named, paradise, in Luk. 23. 43. 2 Cor. 12. 4. It is also applied to the Church of Christ, Revel. 21. & 22. So the Hebrew Doctors gathered from Song. 4. 12. that this garden signified the Church of Israel: R. Menachem, on Gen. 2. 8. in Eden:] a countrie in the upper part of Chaldea, mentioned in Esa. 35. 12. Ezek. 27. 23. and other where. Eden signifieth Pleasure, (of it, the Greekes name Pleasure, Hedone,) and the name sheweth it to bee the pleasantest part of the world: wherefore comparisons are made by it, Esa. 51. 3. Ezek. 31. 16. 18. Vers. 9. desireable:] that is, goodly, pleasant, tall, excellent: as Cedars and the like. See Ezek. 31. 8. 9. 18. tree of life:] which was continually flourishing and fruitfull: unto which the scripture seemeth to have reference, in describing the spirituall Paradise under the Gospell, mentioning the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yeelded her fruit every moneth, and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations, Rev. 22. 2. This was unto Adam a symbolicall tree, a signe not onely of a blessed naturall life in Paradise for a time, but of a spirituall life after in Heaven for ever, if he continued in obedience to his Creator. For as the bread of life, is that which giveth life eternall to them that eate of it, Ioh. 6. 48. 50. 51. so this tree of life signified the like, as God himselfe after sheweth, Gen. 3. 22. Compare also Prov. 13. 12. midst of the garden:] the Greeke sayth, of the paradise: which the Holy Ghost followeth in Rev. 2. 7. saying, to him that overcommeth, I will give to eate of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the Paradise of God. The word midst often signifieth no more then within; as in Gen. 41. 48 amidst the same City, that is, within the same. So, in the midst of thornes, Luke 8. 7. is, among (or into the) thornes, Mat. 4. 7. And the tree of knowledge is said also to be in the midst of the garden, that is, within it, Gen. 3. 3. the knowledge of good and evill:] so named, because of Gods law which forbad man to eate of this tree, should teach what is good and evill; be a rule of obedience, shewing mans goodnesse and righteousnesse if he did obey, (as Deut. 6. 25.) or his evill, if he did transgresse: for the knowledge of sinne, is by the law, Rom. 3. 20. Also knowledge is used for sense, or experience, Gen. 12. 12 Song 6. 11. Esay 59. 8. and sometime for most neere union and conjunction, Gen. 4. 1. and this tree might so have the name of the event, because Adam by eating of it, brought evill into the world, was commingled and defiled with it, and felt the misery of it in his owne conscience & experience, Gen. 3. 6. 7. The Greeke translateth, a tree to know that which may be knowne, of good and evill: and the Chaldee thus, a tree of whose fruit they that eate, shall know the difference between good and evill. So in Thargum Ierusalemy likewise. Vers. 10. to water] From this river, and the use of it in Paradise, the Scripture speaketh of Gods spirit, and graces in his Church: as, the pure river of the water of life, Rev. 22. 1. the river of God full of waters, Psal. 65. 10. the river, whose streames make glad the city of God, Psal. 46. 5. See Iohn 7. 38. 39. was to,] that is, became into foure heads, meaning foure beginnings of other rivers. Vers. 11. Pison:] or, as in the Greeke, Phison: it is so called of the multitude or increase of waters. The Scripture elsewhere speaketh not of it. compasseth:] This word is sometime used for turning and passing along by, though not round about; as in Ios. 15. 3. and 16. 6. where the Greeke translateth it perieleusetai, passe by: and so it may be taked here. Havilah:] in Greeke, Evilat. This was the name of two men, one the sonne of Cush, the sonne of Cham, the sonne of Noe, Gen. 10. 7. the country where hee dwelt, was called by his name, and that is it here mentioned, and after in Gen. 25. 18. 1 Sam. 15. 7. Another Havilah was the sonne of Ioktan, the sonne of Heber, of the race of Sem, sonne of Noe, Gen. 1029. His countrie befell him in the East Indies. Vers. 12. good:] that is, fine, precious: so in 2 Chr. 3. 5. Bdelium:] the name of a tree, and of a sweet gumme that runneth from it. The Hebrew name is Bedólach: and some thinke it to bee a kind of Pearle: the Manna was like unto it, and the colour white, Num. 11. 7. Exod. 16. 31. Beryll:] a precious stone, called in Hebrew Shoham: which the Greeke in Exod. 28. 20. translateth a Beryll; the Chaldee calleth it Burla, and the Arabik al Belor. On two of these stones, the names of the twelve Tribes were graven, and borne on the high Priests shoulders, Exod. 28. 9. 10. see the notes there. Vers. 13. Gihon:] in Greeke, Geon: a river about the land of Cush. There was also another river Gihon in Canaan, neere Ierusalem, whereof see 2 Chron. 32. 30. Cush:] the sonne of Cham, the sonne of Noe, Gen. 10. 6. whose posterity in these parts of the world are called Aethiopians: and so the Greeke here translateth Ethiopia. Vers. 14. Hiddekel:] The signification of this word is of sharpnesse and lightnesse: for it was a swift running river. The Greeke translateth it Tigris, the Tigre, which is the name of a beast very light of foot, as Pliny sheweth, in b. 8. chap. 18. Tigris also in the Medes and Persian tongue, signifieth an arrow, saith Pliny, b. 6. ch. 27. and Q. Curtius b. 4. speaking of this violent River. By it, Daniel saw visions of God, Dan. 10. 4. The Chaldee calleth it Diglat: whereupon the Latines also named it Diglato; Pliny in b. 6. ch. 27. Assyria:] in Hebrew Assur: he was the sonne of Sem, the sonne of Noe, Gen. 10. 22. of whom, his country was called Assyria, famous through all the Scripture; which usually nameth countries and posterities, by the names of the first inhabitants and parents. See the notes on Gen. 12. 10. and 19. 37. is Euphrates:] Hebr. it is Phrath; which river the new Testament calleth Euphrates, Rev. 9. 14. It hath the name of Encrease: for the waters thereof waxe mighty, by snow melting from the mounts of Armenia, and doe make the country fruitfull. This is called the great river, Deut. 1. 7. and 11. 24. Rev. 9. 14. Vers. 15. garden:] in Greeke, paradise. to till:] or, dresse: the Greeke saith, to labour it. The Hebrew Doctors apply this mystically to Adams labour in, and keeping of Gods law: Pirke R. Eliezer chap. 12. And that the morall law, and work therof, was written in his heart, is manifest: seeing the same yet remaineth in the corrupted harts of men, Rom. 2. 14. 15. Vers. 16. commanded:] Besides the law of nature, graven on Adams heart, whereby hee was bound to love, honour and obey his Creator: God here giveth him (for a triall of his love,) a significative law, concerning a thing of it selfe indifferent, but at the pleasure of God made unlawfull and evill for man to doe; that by observing this outward rite, hee might testifie his willing obedience unto the Lord. See 1 Sam. 15. 22. 23. eating thou maist eat:] that is, maist (or shalt) freely eat: thus God first sheweth his love and liberality, before he makes any restraint. The doubling of words is often used in Scripture, for more earnestnesse and assurance, and in things to come, for to signifie speedy performance, Gen. 41. 32. Sometime God altereth this manner of speaking, into other the like; as 2 King. 14. 10. smiting thou hast smitten; for which in 2 Chron. 25. 19. is written, thou saist, loe I have smitten. So, Building I have builded, 1 King. 8. 13. or, as in 2 Chron. 6. 2. and I, I have builded. Sometime the doubling of the word is omitted; as, hath any delivering delivered? 2 King. 18. 33. which another Prophet writeth thus, hath any delivered? Esay 36. 18. In translating also, God useth sometimes the phrase which we follow here; as in Heb. 6. 14. blessing I will blesse thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee: translated into Greeke from Gen. 22. 16. Seeing I have seene, Act. 7. 34. from Exod. 3. 7. Sometime otherwise; as, shot through with darts, Heb. 12. 20. for that which is in Hebrew shooting shot through, Exod. 19. 13. Vers. 17. But of:] Heb. And of: and▪ is often used for but: so translated in the Greeke version, Esay 10. 20. and by the holy Ghost in the New Testament; as 1 Pet. 1. 25. from Esay 40. 8. Heb. 1. 11. 12 from Psal. 102. 27. 28. So here againe, in vers. 20. and in Gen. 3. 3. and 42. 10. and in many other places. [illegible: 1 word] thou maist not,] or thou shalt not eat. This law was given both to the man and woman; which were both called Adam, Gen. 5. 2. and the woman confesseth so much, Gen. 3. 3. and the Greeke version here manifesteth it, saying, yee shall not eat. dying thou shalt dye:] that is, shalt surely and soone dye; or, as the Greeke translateth, ye shall dye the death. Vnder the name of Death, the Scripture comprehendeth, deadly plagues, as the punishment of Aegypt with Locusts, is called a death, Exodus 10. 17. Also, inward astonishments, feares, &c. as Nabals heart died in him, 1 Sam. 25. 37. Likewise outward deadly dangers, and miseries; as Paul was in deaths oft, 2 Cor. 11. 23. It is also used for death in sinne, when men are alienated from the life of God, Ephes. 2. 1. and 4. 18. And for the dissolution of mans soule and body, which we commonly call death, when the soule (or spirit) goeth out of the man, Gen. 35. 18. Psal. 146. 4. And finally, death is the perdition of body and soule in hell, which is eternall perdition from the presence of the Lord; and called, the second death, Mat. 10. 28. 2 Thessal. 1. 9. Rev. 20. 6. 14. These, and whatsoever else mortality, misery, death, the Scriptures mention: are implyed in this iudgement here threatned upon disobedience, Rom. 5. 12. beside miserable bondage under him which hath the power of death, that is the devil, Heb. 2. 14. 15. On the contrary, here is implyed upon condition of his obedience, the promise of eternall life, whereof the tree of life was a signe, Gen. 3. 22. So Paul opposeth death, as the wages of sinne: and eternall life, as the gift of God: which now since mans fall, is onely by Christ, who giveth us to eat of the tree of life: Rom. 6. 23. Rev. 2. 7. The Hebrew Doctors also say, After the opinion of our Rabbines of blessed memory, if [Adam] had not sinned, he had never died; but the breath which he was inspired with, of the most high blessed God, should have given him life for ever, and the good will of God, which he had in the time of his creation, had cleaved unto him continually, and kept him alive for ever, R. Menachem, on Gen. 2. 17. Vers. 18. himselfe alone:] or, alone, as the Greeke translateth it: so 1 King. 19. 10. I am left my selfe alone: for which Paul saith, I am left alone, Rom. 11. 3 God who made other creatures male and female together, did not so in mankind: which Paul observeth, saying, Adam was first formed, then Eve, 1 Tim. 2. 13. making it one reason of the womans subjection. as before him.] the Greeke here translateth it, according to him; and in the 20. verse, like unto him meaning, one that should be as his second selfe, like him in nature, knit unto him in love, needfull for procreation of seed, helpfull in all duties, present alwayes with him, and so very meet and commodious for him. The Apostle hence gathereth another reason of the womans subjection, in that the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man, 1 Cor. 11. 9. V. 19. them unto Adam:] or, unto the man: but the Greek version keepeth the Hebrew name Adam, & addeth the word them, for to make the sense plain. So the holy Ghost sometime doth, in repeating matters; as, he blessed and brake, Mat. 14. 19. that is, and brake them, Luke 9. 16. Shew to the Priest, Mar. 1. 44. that is, shew thy selfe, Mat. 8. 4. See also Gen. 31. 42. would call them:] or, call it, that is, every of them. This sheweth Gods bounty, in giving man dominion over all earthly creatures, Psal. 8. for the giving of names, is a signe of soveraignty, Numb. 32. 38. 41. Gen. 35. 18. and 26. 18. It manifesteth also Adams wisedome, in naming things presently according to their natures; as the Hebrew names by which he called them, doe declare. Vers. 20. he found not,] that is, the man found not a meet helpe for himselfe, among all the creatures; therefore the woman when shee was made, was the more acceptable. Or, as the Greeke translateth, there was not found an helper like unto him. So in Gen. 15. 6. he imputed it, is translated, it was imputed, Rom. 4. 3. See also Gen 6. 20. and 16. 14. Vers. 21. a dead fleepe:] This the Greeke calleth an extasie, or trance; which the Scriptures shew to have falne also on men, when they did see visions of God, as Gen. 15. 12. Act. 10. 10. In such deepe-sleepe, the senses are all bound up, as 1 Sam. 26. 12. V. 22. builded:] To build the rib to a woman, is to make, or create a woman of it, as with a speciall care, or art, and fit proportion. Hereupon our bodies are called houses, Iob 4. 19. 2 Cor. 5. 1. And although by building, is meant making; (as the Lord will build thee an house, 1 Chron. 17. 10. is the same that he will make thee an house, 2 Sam. 7. 11.) yet by the many words used in the generation of man-kind, as creating, Gen. 1. 27. making, Gen. 1. 26. forming, and inspiring, Gen. 2. 7. and now building: Moses would set forth this wondrous workmanship, which the Psalmist so laudeth God for, Psal. 139. 14. he brought:] God her builder, was also her bringer, and so her conjoyner in mariage with the man, Mat. 19. 6. and the Scripture noteth a wife, to be a speciall favour of the Lord, Pro. 18. 22. and 19. 14. He also blessed them together, as Gen. 1. 28. whereby may bee seene, how Moses changeth the order in this Chapter; inlarging things here, which before he had touched briefly. Vers. 23. This now:] or, this time: this once. flesh, &c.] Hereby Adam shewed, both his thankfulnesse to God, and love to his wife: and from hence Paul teacheth, that men ought to love their wives as their owne bodies, for no man ever hated his owne flesh, Ephes. 5. 28. 29. The like speeches are used of persons neere a kin, that they are their bone and their flesh, Gen. 29. 14. Judg. 9. 2. So the Apostle by this, setteth forth Christs mystical union with his Church, that we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones, Ephes. 5. 30. woman:] or, Mannesse, of Man: as in Hebrew shee is called Ishah, of Ish: which word Ish, hath the signification of strength and valour: so that the Scripture useth this word, shew your selves men, for, be yee strong, or couragious, Esay 46. 8. 1 Cor. 16. 13. And it hath affinity with Esh, which in Hebrew is fire: for heat in man, causeth strength and courage. Therefore as Adam is used for base men, borne of adamah, the earth: so Ish is used for noblemen, Psal. 49. 3. Also Ish, is used both for man and husband: and Ishah, both for woman, and wife: as in the verses following. out of man:] The Greeke translateth, out of her man; and the Chaldee, out of her husband. Hence is a third reason of womens subjection, because the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man, as Paul saith, 1 Cor. 11. 8. Vers. 24. leave his father, &c.] This is a perpetu▪ all law, given of God, as Christ sheweth, Mat. 19. 4. 5. and teacheth that the band of mariage, is the neerest conjunction in the world, and all societies rather to be left, then this betweene man and wife, who may not depart one from another, 1 Cor. 7. 10. 11. as they doe depart from their parents, Gen. 24. 58. 59. and 31. 14. Lev. 22. 12. 13. The like is observed in the spirituall mariage, between Christ and his Church, Psal. 45. 11. 12. The Chaldee translateth it, he shall leave the bed of his father and mother. And the Hebrew Doctors gathered from hence a law unto all Adams sonnes, against unjust carnall copulations, and incestuous mariages, with a mans fathers wife, or mother in law; and with his owne mother; as after, by he shall cleave to his wife, (they say) is forbidden any other mans wife; and all pollution with the male, and likewise with beasts, Maimony in Misn. book 14. treat of Kings: chap. 9. [illegible: 1 word]. 5. to his wife:] or, to his woman: for it is the same word Ishah, used before in verse 23. and by his woman, he sheweth there is no lawfull conjunction for a man but with one, and she a wife, become his by mariage. Wherefore all other women, are in this respect called strangers to him, Prov. 5. 3. 18. 20. And for shall cleave, the Greeke saith, shall bee glewed: which word is also in Mar. 10. 7. & maketh against all unjust divorces. they shall be:] the Greeke translateth, they two shall be one flesh: and so it is alledged in the New Testament, Mat. 19. 5. that hereby a man is restrained from more wives then one: which is to be observed in other speeches of Scripture, wherein like restraint is implyed: as, him thou shalt serve, Deut. 6. 13. that is, as Christ alledgeth it, him onely, Mat. 4. 10. Luke 4. 8. So, but for the Priests, Mar. 3. 26. which another Evangelist writeth, but for the Priests onely, Mat. 12. 4. Of like force is that saying, a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ; that is, by faith onely, Gal. 2. 16. one:] or, to one flesh: See vers. 7. This is meant in speciall, by generation of children: wherefore Paul doth by proportion apply these words even against unlawfull fleshly copulation, 1 Cor. 6. 16. adding a further mystery of our union with Christ, hee that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit, vers. 17. Vers. 25. not ashamed:] thought not themselves in any shamefull plight: as a Chaldee paraphrase saith, they knew not what shame was. For they being innocent, and adorned with the image and glory of God, had nothing in soule or body, that was defective, miserable, or shamefull: but now by sin, nakednesse in us, is a want, a filthy thing, and a shame, Deut. 28. 48. Rev. 3. 18. For shame or confusion is the fruit of sin, Rom. 6. 21. the opposite of joy, Esay 65. 13. and companion of destruction, Ier. 48. 20.